T   ■'■"RT>    A  TiTTTT 


SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS 
OF  ASSISI 


BY 

ELLEN  SCOTT  DAVISON,  B.  S.,  A.  M. 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN   THE 

Faculi-y  of  Political  Science  of 
Columbia  University 


1907 


0  2°\ 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 


Introductory 


CHAPTER  n 
Apostolic  Sects  Allied  to  the  Cathari 


i6 


Arnold  of  Brescia 


CHAPTER  in 


31 


The  Humiliati 


CHAPTER  IV 


55 


409U1 


CHAPTER  I 
Introductory 

Early  in  the  thirteenth  century,  there  appeared  almost 
simultaneously  in  different  parts  of  southern  Europe  two  men 
destined  to  influence  the  lives  of  multitudes :  Dominic,  a  noble 
Spaniard  and  a  scholar ;  Francis,  son  of  a  merchant  in  the  little 
Italian  town  of  Assisi,  destitute  of  the  learning  of  the  schools. 
Both  believed  that,  as  disciples  of  Christ,  they  were  bound  to 
obey  literally  the  commands  of  the  Master :  to  teach ;  to  help 
the  suffering;  to  live,  as  Christ  had  told  His  Apostles  to  do,  in 
utter  poverty.  Throngs  of  followers  eager  to  spend  their  lives 
in  apostolic  poverty  speedily  gathered  about  both  men. 

Both  Francis  and  Dominic  were  born  leaders  of  men ;  but  in 
no  age  can  any  man  lead  the  masses  except  in  paths  toward 
which  the  age  is  tending.  The  movement,  quickened  by  them 
into  a  world-force,  was  in  its  underlying  principle  and  even  in 
its  details  no  new  one.  Apostles  of  primitive  Christianity  and 
of  evangelical  poverty  had  arisen  in  the  church  at  various 
times,  especially  since  the  opening  of  the  eleventh  century ; 
and  a  clear  appreciation  of  these  earlier  movements,  orthodox 
and  heretical,  is  necessary  to  a  full  understanding  of  the  origin 
and  growth  of  the  Mendicant  orders. 

Francis  and  Dominic  remained  devout  sons  of  the  Church; 
yet  the  basis  of  their  action  was  essentially  a  protest  against 
the  existing  condition  of  the  ecclesiastical  institution,  which  was 
far  removed  from  the  apostolic  ideal.  The  history  of  Christi- 
anity presents  a  series  of  such  movements ;  protests  against  the 
conformity  of  the  Church  as  an  institution  with  universal  social 
and  economic  laws. 

Early  Christianity  was  an  enthusiasm  for  an  ideal,  an  attempt 
to  regulate  individual  life  according  to  the  precepts  and  com- 
mands of  Christ.     Among  His  commands  were  several  which, 

5 


6  SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

if  followed  literally,  would  have  barred  effectually  the  develop- 
ment of  any  institution  based  on  Christianity.  When  the  young 
man  who  had  great  possessions  asked  Jesus  what  he  should  do 
to  inherit  eternal  life,  the  answer  was :  "  Sell  that  thou  hast> 
and  give  to  the  poor."  When  Christ  sent  the  Twelve  forth  to 
preach,  He  said  to  them:  "Provide  neither  gold,  nor  silver, 
nor  brass  in  your  purses,  nor  scrip  for  your  journey,  neither 
two  coats,  neither  shoes,  nor  yet  staves."  "  Go  ye  into  all  the 
world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature."  These  com- 
mands, literally  obeyed,  would  have  made  of  the  men  vowed  to 
spend  their  lives  in  Christ's  service  a  company  of  penniless 
wanderers.  No  institution  has  ever  existed  in  a  society  based 
on  property  without  holding  property.  Further,  every  com- 
munity or  individual  that  holds  possessions  must  manage  and 
defend  them ;  yet  Christ  said :  "  Resist  not  evil ;  but  whoso- 
ever shall  smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other 
also.  And  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  the  law,  and  take  away 
thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloke  also." 

Even  during  the  life  of  Christ  on  earth  there  were  signs  that 
the  little  company  of  His  followers  was  becoming  an  organized 
community.  Christ  had  laid  upon  His  disciples  obligations 
which  could  not  be  fulfilled  without  resulting  in  definite  and 
extensive  organization.  They  were,  for  example,  to  take  con- 
stant care  of  the  weaker  brethren,  to  teach  and  baptize  all 
nations,  to  establish  and  maintain  the  cult  of  Christ  throughout 
the  world.' 

The  process  by  which  the  Church  became  an  organized, 
property-holding  institution  is  obscure,  and  cannot  be  traced 
here.''  That  it  had  already  become  such  an  institution  before 
it  was  given  a  legal  existence  by  Galerius  and  Constantine, 
their  edicts  bear  witness.^     The  development  of  the  institution 

*  Luke  lo:  27  5if^.     Matth.   19:21. 

*  The  reader  may  be  referred  to  Friedberg,  Ki7-chenrecht,  pp.  10  seq.  (ed.  1895). 
A.  V.  G.  Allen,  Chrisiiai?  Institutions,  Chapters  ii-viii. 

'  Edict  of  Galerius  (311),  Lactantius,  De  Mortibus  Persecutor  urn,  c.  34.  Edict  of 
Constantine  (Milan,  313),  Lactantius,  ibid.,  c.  48.  Codex  Theodosianus,  lib.  xvi 
(ed.  Haenel).  Boyd,  The  Ecclesiastical  Edicts  in  the  Theodosian  Code,  Columbia 
Univ.,  doctor's  dissertation,  1904.  Eor  comment,  Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  vol.  21,  pp.  132  seq.     Ed.  Bury,  1896. 


INTRODUCTORY  7 

along  lines  already  marked  out  was  stimulated  by  the  new  impe- 
rial policy.  When  the  Church  was  sanctioned  by  the  Empire 
it  gained  the  opportunity  for  larger  functions,  and  received 
endowments  of  land  and  of  other  wealth  which  made  possible 
the  performance  of  those  functions.'  The  Church  of  the  poor 
became  the  Church  of  the  rich  and  powerful. 

The  Bishops  had  now  two  functions.  They  were  shepherds 
of  men,  as  Christ  had  commanded  them  to  be ;  they  were  also 
administrators  of  wealth,  an  office  forced  into  their  hands  by  the 
inevitable  logic  of  events."  Their  secular  obligations  were  des- 
tined to  grow  heavier  in  the  age  that  followed.  Before  the 
time  of  Constantine  the  Empire's  strength  had  been  taxed  to 
keep  the  barbarian  invaders  beyond  her  frontiers.  Later,  as 
province  after  province  fell  into  the  hands  of  Germanic  chiefs, 
the  civil  organization  of  the  Empire  was  shattered.  In  many 
districts  the  Bishops  became  the  sole  representatives  of  the  old 
law  and  order.  They  had  civic  functions  while  the  Rhine  and 
the  Danube  still  separated  the  Roman  world  from  the  barbarian. 
These  functions  were  now  expanded  as  the  need  for  them  grew 
greater.3  Further,  in  the  prevailing  confusion  the  landed  prop- 
erty of  the  Church  increased.  Barbarian  kings  were  used  to 
offer  gifts  to  their  gods,  just  as  they  sent  presents  to  chieftains 
whose  friendship  they  sought;  converted  to  Christianity,  they 
gave  freely  of  their  vast,  new  lands  and  of  their  treasure  to  the 
God  who  gave  them  victory.'*  Many  estates  fell  into  the  hands 
of  the  Church  because  of  this  naive  faith ;  others  by  the  work- 
ing of  more  complex  motives  and  forces.  In  Italy,  Pepin 
asserted  no  claim  to  the  lands  which,  at  Pope  Gregory's  call,  he 
had  freed  from  the  Lombards ;  and  Charles  the  Great  drew  the 
southern  boundary  of  his   Kingdom   of  Lombardy  somewhat 

^  Codex  Theodosianurt,  lib.  xvi,  tit.  4.  Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall  {t.A.  Bury,  1896), 
vol.  ii,  pp.  320  seq. 

■^Gibbon's  Decline  atid Fall  (ed.  Bury,  1896),  vol.  ii,  pp.  39-47,  53-54.  3^2  seq. 

'Milman,  Latin  Clirisiianiiy^  vol.  i,  pp.  95  seq;  pp.  162  seq.  Allard,  Le  Chris- 
*iatiisme  et  V Empire  Romain,  pp.  150  seq. 

*Milman,  iliid.,  pp.  399  seq.  Montalembert,  Tke  Monks  of  the  West,  vol.  ii,  pp. 
123  seq. 


8  SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

north  of  Rome.  The  ancient  capital  of  the  world,  with  the  sur- 
rounding territory,  became  the  capital  of  the  Church,  the  domin- 
ion of  the  Pope.  The  occupant  of  the  chair  of  Peter  the 
Fisherman  became  the  possessor  of  an  enormous  patrimony. 

Christ's  apostles,  commanded  by  Him  to  have  "  neither  gold 
nor  silver,"  to  wander  from  city  to  city,  teaching  and  baptizing, 
seeking  no  settled  home,  were  succeeded  by  men  who  held  and 
administered  property  in  trust  for  the  needs  of  the  ecclesiastical 
community,  and  who  wielded  the  power  of  secular  potentates. 
The  institution  which  had  grown  out  of  the  religion  of  Christ 
was  at  variance  with  the  commands  of  Christ.  This  contradic- 
tion of  the  ideal  by  the  real  did  not  escape  the  notice  of 
idealists.  From  the  beginning  of  the  Church's  triumph  there 
were  men  whose  lives  were  protests  against  the  Church  as  an 
institution,  and  attempts  to  follow  literally  the  most  ascetic 
commands  of  Christ. 

The  triumph  of  the  Church  as  an  institution  and  the  great 
extension  of  the  Christian  monastic  movement  were  co-incident. 
The  age  of  the  great  Christian  Councils  was  the  age  of  Jerome, 
prophet  of  monasticism,'  and  every  further  development  of  the 
Church  as  an  institution  has  been  accompanied  by  a  reaction 
toward  asceticism.  The  rule  of  Benedict  of  Nursia  found 
numerous  and  enthusiastic  adherents  during  the  pontificate  of 
Gregory  I ;  =  under  Gregory  VII,  or  during  the  fifty  years  fol- 
lowing his  death,  were  founded  the  order  of  Grammont,  most 
rigid  in  discipline,  the  Carthusian  brotherhood,  the  Premon- 
stratensian  order,  and,  by  the  great  Bernard,  the  monastery  of 
Clairvaux.3  The  age  of  Innocent  III  was  the  age  of  Dominic 
and  of  Francis  of  Assisi.  Monasticism  is,  it  is  true,  based  on 
complex  human  motives,  yet  in  the  origin  of  many  rapidly 
growing  monastic  bodies  may  be  found,  acting  as  a  compelling 
force,  this  one  motive :  protest  against  the  non-apostolic  char- 
acter of  existing  ecclesiastical  institutions.     Not  that  the  men 

'Milman,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  115  seq.     Milman,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  190  seq.  ;ed.  1892). 
*Montalembert,  ibid,,  vol.  i,  pp.  389  seq. 

*\Vunii,  Der  heilige  Bernard,  passim.     Luchaire,  Manual  des  Institutions  Fran- 
faises,  pp.  100  seq. 


INTRODUCTORY  q 

who  first,  by  devotion  to  the  apostolic  life,  furnished  centres  for 
these  movements  were  all  consciously  led  to  do  so  by  dissatis- 
faction with  the  Church's  worldliness.  Francis  certainly  was 
not  influenced  by  this  motive,  but  doubtless  the  rapid  growth  of 
his  band  of  followers  was  due  to  the  fact  that  many  other  men 
felt  the  need  of  a  life  strictly  given  to  obeying  these  commands 
of  Christ  which  lead  to  asceticism  and  the  impossibility  of  such 
a  life  in  the  Church.  It  was  this  same  need  to  which  was  due, 
in  close  succession,  the  growth  of  the  various  sects  of  heretical 
Apostolic  Christians — the  Arnoldists,  the  Humiliati,  the 
Waldenses.' 

However,  monasticism,  at  first  a  protest  against  the  institu- 
tional side  of  Christianity,  became  itself  an  institution.  The 
noble  works  done  by  the  monastic  com.munities  while  their 
faith  was  young  and  the  enthusiasm  which  had  brought  them 
into  being  was  still  undimmed,  are  too  familiar  to  need  reitera- 
tion. We  can  go  with  the  early  missionaries  into  Germany  and 
Gaul,  with  Sturmi  into  the  forest  hard  by  "  the  fell  Saxons," 
with  Columban  into  Frisia,  or  Gall  into  Suabia;^  all  fugitives 
from  the  world,  seeking  a  life  of  poverty,  simplicity,  and  self- 
denial,  combating  paganism  and  the  wilderness.3  The  rigors  of 
the  conflict  forced  upon  these  men  and  their  devoted  followers 
close  and  efficient  organization.  Their  very  virtues  led  to  their 
undoing.  Gifts  to  God  brought  salvation  to  the  givers ;  and 
gifts  to  the  monks  were  gifts  to  God.  So  secular  responsi- 
bility increased,  and  with  it  power  to  command  luxury.  The 
growing  institution  of  monasticism.  was  already  departing  from 
the  spirit  of  the  first  enthusiasts  when  the  genius  of  Benedict  of 
Nursia  gave  it  definite  shape  in  the  Rule  which  seeks,  while 
organizing  the  institution,  to  maintain  for  the  individual  some- 
thing of  literal  obedience  to  Christ's  command  "  Be  ye  poor." 

*  See  below,  pp.  50  se(j.  '•'Montaleml-jert,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  241,  292  set]. 

'  Montalembert,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  30-47;  vol.  ii,  pp.  185  seq.  On  the  services  of 
the  monks  to  civilization  see  also  Sommerlad,  Die  wirlschafiliche  Thdtigkeii  der 
Kirche  im  Mittelaller,  passim. 

*The  Rule  of  Benedict  has  been  edited  many  times.  See,  for  insi.ince,  BettedicH 
Regula  Monachoruvi,  recensuit  Eduardus  WoelfHin  {1895).  See  Monialenibert, 
ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  389  seq. 


lO       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

But  Benedict  undertook  what  was  impossible ;  he  tried  to  com- 
bat by  formal  laws  the  inevitable  sequence  of  events.  Monastic 
communities  became  rich  and  powerful,  luxurious  and  pleasure- 
loving. 

Voices  were,  it  is  true,  never  lacking  to  demand  that  the 
monks  be  faithful  to  their  original  aims,  and  in  truth  in  the 
eleventh  century,  monasticism  alone  among  Christian  institu- 
tions kept  alive  even  the  tradition  of  evangelical  poverty.' 
Ecclesiastical  offices  were  sought  by  men  who  coveted  their 
revenues  and  paid  scant  attention  to  the  duties  which  they  in- 
volved.^ Simony  was  rife,3  The  revenues  of  benefices  were 
often  increased  in  questionable  ways.  For  example,  Bishops 
and  Abbots  alike  saw  in  the  adoration  of  relics  a  means  by 
which  the  wealth  and  influence  of  their  churches  might  be  in- 
creased, and  they  were  not  always  scrupulous  as  to  the  means 
by  which  they  obtained  such  relics.  Sometimes  prelates  in- 
vented and  circulated  histories  of  the  saints  whose  relics  they 
possessed,  exalting  their  merits  and  the  miiracle-working  power 
of  their  bones,  that  pilgrims  might  be  induced  to  visit  their 
shrines  in  large  numbers,  and  leave  rich  gifts  behind  them.'* 

Men  who  ruled  vast  lands  had  to  become  princes  rather  than 
shepherds  if  they  were  to  keep  their  possessions.  In  times  of 
political  disorder,  all  owners  of  property  must  protect  it  by 
means  more  drastic  than  the  imposition  of  penance,  or  even 

'  Dresdner,  Kultur-  mid  Sittengeschichte  tier  Italieniuhen  Geist'ichkeit  im  icten 
und  men  yahrliundert,/<?w/w.  Especially  pp.  50  seq.  De  Welte,  Ceschichle  der 
Ckristliclien  Siitenlehre,  passim.  Delaifc,  Si.  Gre^oire  et  la  rejorme  de  Peglise, 
passim. 

*  Gerohus  Reichersl-ergensis,  De  Investigatione  Aniichristi,  lib.  i,  0.  42.  Ed, 
Scheilielberger,  p.  88.  For  a  diverting  accrunt  of  an  Archbishop  of  Rheiins  who 
quite  frankly  found  his  duties  a  nuisance,  see  Guibertus  Novigenti,  De  Vita  Sua,  \\h.. 
i,  c.  II,  ed.  D'Achery,  p.  467.  He  quotes  the  Archbishop,  a  certain  Manasses, 
"Bonus  esset  Remensis  archiepiscopus  si  non  niissas  inde  canlari  oporteret."  Ihe 
same  prelate  robbed  Uie  treasury  (10S4).     See  below,  pp.  29  seq, 

'  See  note  i . 

*  For  various  stories  illustrating  this  point,  see  Guib.  Nov.,  De  Pignorihus  Sanc- 
torum, lib.  i,  cc.  2  and  3;  lib.  ii,  c.  3,  ed.  D'Achery,  pp.  334  seq.  See  also  a  satire 
on  the  zeal  for  relic  hunting  displayed  by  Pope  Urban  11,  in  Pflugk-Harttung,  Iter 
Italicum,  pp.  439  seq. 


INTRODUCTORY  I I 

excommunication.'  At  all  times  when  a  foreign  foe  harried 
the  land,  Bishops  and  Abbots,  like  Counts  and  Dukes,  had  to 
arm  themselves  against  the  invaders.^  Not  only  was  defence 
necessary  on  the  battle-field,  but  often  in  the  courts.  While 
some  laymen  gave  gifts  to  the  Church  to  secure  rest  for  their 
souls,  other  laym.en  were  always  ready  to  seize  Church  property 
on  any  plausible  pretext,  or  without  a  pretext.^  It  is  not  diffi- 
cult, then,  to  understand  the  preoccupation  of  the  higher 
clergy  with  secular  affairs,  and  their  consequent  neglect  of  their 
spiritual  functions.  Bishops  who  had  sought  preferment  in  the 
Church  for  the  sake  of  wealth  and  power,  were  almost  of  neces- 
sity engrossed  in  the  material  cares  which  wealth  and  power 
brought  with  them.  They  frequently  did  not  labor  to  organize 
their  dioceses,  nor  secure  for  their  people  an  active  and  com- 
petent priesthood.  It  was  then  not  only  the  prelates  who  be- 
came false  to  their  apostolic  commission ;  the  lower  clergy 
suffered  also. 

It  is  impossible  to  speak  with  certainty  of  the  character  of 
the  lower  clergy  as  a  class  in  the  period  preceding  the  reform 
movenient  in  the  eleventh  century.  The  literature  of  the  time 
abounds  with  drastic  criticism  of  the  evil  lives  of  the  priests, 
and  of  their  neglect  of  duty.*  Nevertheless,  there  were  doubt- 
less God-fearing  priests,  laboring  in  obscurity,  sincerely  ful- 
filling their  duty  to  their  people,  so  far   as  their  ability  and 

'Geroh.  Reicherslerg,  De  Itivestigatione,  lib.  i,  c.  42.  Peter  Damian  says  an 
abbot  could  not  be  a  monk,  nor  a  bishop  a  priest.  Opusc.  21,  praef.  opp.  vol.  iii,. 
p.  455- 

*See  llvgn,  Desiruclio  Farfense,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xi,  pp.  532  seq.  Also  Ekke- 
hard,  Cas.  S.  Galli.  M.  G.  11.  SS. ,  vol.  ii,  pp.  105-109.  Also,  for  Monle  Cassino,^ 
Desiderii,  Abbatis  Casinensi  Dialogi,  lib.  i.  Eibl.  Max.  Fatr.  Lugd.,  vol.  xviii,  pp. 
339  ^eq. 

'See  Suger,  Gesta  Ludovici  regis  cognonienio  grossi,  cc.  2,  23  (ed.  Molinier,  in 
Collection  des  iextes),  for  accounts  of  attacks  on  ecclesiastical  property  in  France  in 
the  early  twelfth  century.  Seher,  Abbot  of  Chamonzey  in  the  diocese  of  Toul,  tells 
of  his  struggle  to  keep  his  property.  Seheri,  Frimordia  Calinosiacensia,  M.  G.  H. 
SS. ,  vol.  xii,  pp.  324-347.  The  Canons  of  Lucca  built  a  castle  for  defence  against 
an  aggressive  layman.  Muratori,  Antiquitates,  vol.  iv,  p.  733.  See  also  Dresdner,. 
ibid.,  pp.  87  seq. 

*Dresdner,  ibid.,  pp.  \00  seq. 


12        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

education  allowed.  History  does  not  record  the  lives  of  incon- 
spicuous, commonplace,  good  men,  whether  they  be  priests  or 
laymen.  Now  and  then  a  virtuous  priest  rose  into  notice  be- 
cause he  was  an  eloquent  preacher;  but  unless  he  possessed 
conspicuous  gifts,  a  worthy  priest  lived  and  died  and  left  no 
record.  The  lower  clergy  were  drawn  largely  from  the  com- 
mon people,  and  it  was  among  the  common  people  that  re- 
ligious enthusiasm  never  waned.  Further,  reform  movements 
always  found  adherents  among  the  common  people  and  among 
the  lower  clergy.' 

Yet  it  would  seem  that  there  was  ample  justification  for  the 
abuse  heaped  upon  the  priests.  How  could  it  be  otherwise? 
Little  effort  seems  to  have  been  made  by  the  bishops  to  secure 
the  proper  preparation  of  priests  for  holy  office,  or  to  limit 
ordination  and  installation  to  men  of  God-fearing  lives;  nor 
was  episcopal  supervision  always  directed  to  securing  faithful- 
ness to  duty.  The  Bishop  who  had  paid  a  high  price  for  his 
benefice  exacted  payment  in  his  turn  for  the  humbler  ofifices  in 
his  gift.  Too  often  a  priest  was  chosen  because  he  could  pay 
for  his  appointment,  not  because  he  was  fit  to  have  the  cure  of 
souls.  There  is,  then,  ample  evidence  that  many  of  the  clergy 
were  ignorant,  neglectful,  sinful ;  that  churches  were  allowed 
to  fall  into  ruins,  while  their  priests  took  the  tithes,  sometimes 
sold  the  very  vessels  from  the  altars,  and  did  not  cumber  them- 
selves with  the  cure  of  souls.''  It  is  true  that  it  cannot  always 
have  been  possible  to  secure  competent  priests;  educational 
facilities  were  scanty  in  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries.  It 
is  on  the  other  hand  undeniable  that  most  bishops  were  too 
busy  with  the  cares  of  state  and  wealth  to  make  the  attempt. 

There  is  little  material  for  judging  what  the  layman  desired 
of  his  priest.  The  clearest  light  is  thrown  on  the  subject  by  a 
study  of  the  enthusiasts  who  easily  gained  a  following.  Within 
the  Church  itself,  the  source  of  the  prevailing  evils  was  often 

'  Dresdner,  ?6i(/.,  pp.  169  se^.  Note  Arialdus  in  Milan,  see  t.elow.  Also  Arnold, 
see  below. 

-Dresdner,  i/>id.,  pp.  ico  set/.  S.  jkrnard,  De  conside7-atione,  lib.  i%',  c.  2.  Ed. 
Mabillon,  vol.  i,  oc.  436  se'/. 


IXTRODUCTORV  j^ 

declared  to  be  the  possession  of  wealth.  The  Church  had 
always  praised  poverty ;  but  generally  the  eulogies  refer  to  in- 
dividual poverty  coupled  with  communistic  possession,  which 
did  not  exclude  individual  enjoyment/  The  inconsistency  be- 
tween the  actual  wealth  of  the  clergy  and  their  theoretical 
poverty  was  not  lost  upon  thoughtful  and  conscientious  church- 
men. "We  seek,"  says  Abelard,  •'  to  be  made  richer  as  monks 
than  we  were  in  the  world."  ^^  Gerohus,  of  Reichersberg, 
laments :  "  The  Bishops  claim  that  the  evangelical  perfection 
in  which  Peter  gloried,  saying  to  the  Lord,  *  Behold,  we  leave 
all  and  follow  Thee,'  and  of  which  the  Lord  said,  '  Unless  a 
man  has  given  up  all  that  he  possesses,  he  cannot  be  my  dis- 
ciple,' that  this  perfection  pertains  to  the  monks  alone,  and  not 
to  the  secular  clergy."  3  By  these  men,  members  of  the  clergy 
were  criticized  because  they  appropriated  to  unwarranted  uses 
the  wealth  of  the  Church,  or  because  they,  as  individuals, 
possessed  property.  The  tendency  to  such  criticism  increased 
during  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries.-*  On  the  one  hand, 
reformers  protested  against  the  individual  possession  of  wealth 
by  the  clergy,  and  the  misuse  of  property  held  in  com.mon ;  on 
the  other,  there  arose  a  more  radical  conception  of  evangelical 
poverty,  which  excluded  even  communistic  possession  by  the 
clergy,  and  in  some  instances  by  the  laity  as  well.     An  investi- 

^  S.  Bernard,  /.  c.  Ser^no :  In  Solemnitaie  Omniutn  Sanctorum,  Igniacensis  S. 
Bernaidi  Discipulis,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  cc.  1043-1044. 

*  Abelard,  De  Sancto  Joanne  Baptisla  Servio.     Opera,  ed.  Cousin,  vol.  1,  p.  572. 

'Geroh.  Reichersbergensis,  De  Invesiigaiione  Anticlnisti,  lib.  i,  c.  43.  Jlnd.,  p. 
90.  Cf.  the  practical  protest  against  the  wealth  of  the  clergy  by  Arialdus  of  Milan. 
See  Vita  Arialdi,  AA.  SS.  Boll.  V  Junii,  p.  282,  and  below,  p.  32.  Cf.  also  St. 
Norbert,  Archbishop  of  Magdeburg,  to  1 127,  who  gave  all  his  wealth  to  the  poor  and 
travelled  about  barefoot,  preaching.  Vita  S.  Norberti,  M,  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xii,  p. 
673.  See  also  p.  8  above.  The  founder  of  the  Chartreuse  fled  to  the  desert  in 
disgust  at  the  luxurious  lives  of  the  clergy  of  Rheims,  and  their  misuse  of  ecclesias- 
tical property.  See  Guibertus  Novigenti,  De  Vita  Sua,  lib.  i,  c.  11,  ed.  D'Acbery, 
p.  467. 

*Note,  for  instance,  many  passages  in  the  sermons  of  Berthold  von  Regensbutg; 
for  example,  ed.  Pfeiffer-Strohl,  pp.  93  seq.  and  393-4;  also  Guibert.  Novigenti,  /.  f.; 
also  Jacques  de  Vitry,  Historia  Occidentalis,  c.  5  (ed.  1596,  pp.  272  seq.);  also  De- 
siderius,  De  Miraculis  S.  Benedicti,  in  Bil.l.  Max.  Patrum.  Lugd.,  vol.  xviii,  pp. 
839  seq.;  also  John  of  Salisbury,  Polycraiicus,  bk.  iv,  cc.  2-5. 


14        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

gation  and  analysis  of  this  enthusiasm  for  evangelical  poverty 
is  the  precise  subject  of  this  essay. 

We  cannot  know  to  what  degree  this  tendency  to  emphasize 
poverty  as  an  integral  part  of  Christianity  was  due  to  a  realiza- 
tion that  wealth  was  corrupting  the  Church ;  to  the  contrast 
between  the  simple  life  and  the  privations  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles,  and  the  magnificence  and  luxury  which  surrounded 
the  clergy.  As  this  study  proceeds,  however,  an  effort  will  be 
made  to  explain  the  conditions  under  which  each  reformer  be- 
gan his  work,  and  it  will  become  apparent  in  some  cases  that 
there  was  certainly  present  an  element  of  direct  reaction  against 
the  unapostolic  character  of  the  lives  of  the  clergy  and  the 
magnificent  ceremonial  of  the  Church. 

Efforts  to  restore  primitive  Christianity,  to  follow  literally  the 
commands  of  Christ  and  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles  in  daily 
life  and  in  religious  observance  were  very  numerouc,  in  the 
eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries.  The  conceptions  men  formed 
of  the  essence  of  Apostolic  Christianity  varied  widely.  The 
fundamental  motive  of  all  was  the  same :  they  would  live  as 
Christ  taught  men  to  live;  they  would  conform  their  worship 
to  that  of  the  little  group  of  believers  who  first  followed  Him 
in  far-away  Palestine.  Arialdus  and  Waldo,  Arnold  and 
Francis,'  agreed  in  basing  the  apostolic  life  on  evangelical 
poverty.  But  Waldo  wished  to  sweep  away  all  doctrines,  all 
religious  observances,  which  were  not  found  in  the  Church  of 
the  apostolic  age ;  Arnold  believed  that  the  vicar  of  Christ 
should  not  be  a  secular  prince,  and  assailed  the  whole  vast 
fabric  of  the  temporal  power  of  the  Church ;  Arialdus  tried  to 
purge  the  Church  of  simony,  to  teach  the  priests  to  lead  pure 
lives;  Francis  saw  clearly  his  own  duty — to  be  poor,  as  Christ 
had  commanded,  to  help  suffering  humanity',  while  he  upheld 
the  Church  as  an  institution. 

Moreover,  in  these  two  centuries,  a  great  tide  of  religious 
enthusiasm  swept  over  the  nations  of  western  Europe.  The 
eleventh  century  was  the  age  of  the  Cluniac  Reform,  of  the 

'  See  below,  pp.  32.  33  set/. 


INTRODUCTORY  I^ 

foundation  of  Cistercian  and  Carthusian  orders,  of  the  first 
great  Crusade.  The  twelfth  century  brought  to  light  many 
new  enthusiasts,  most  of  whom  the  Church  counted  as  heretics. 
These  men  were  in  most  cases  reformers  as  truly  as  were 
Norbert  and  St.  Bernard.  The  leaders  among  them  spoke  in 
Christ's  name,  and  voiced  Christ's  co,mmands.  The  multitude 
followed,  and  found  itself  outside  the  Church  which  claimed  to 
be  the  fold  of  Christ.  They  did  not  plan  heresy ;  they,  in 
many  instances,  thought  themselves  champions  of  the  Church. 
Waldo,  like  Francis,  asked  the  Pope  to  sanction  his  work,  to 
authorize  him  to  help  the  Church  in  teaching  the  people  to  fol- 
low Christ.  Orthodox  and  heretical  reformers  were  alike  pro- 
ducts of  the  religious  enthusiasm  of  the  age,  and  sought  to 
restore  apostolic  Christianity.  All  found  a  following.  Wher- 
ever a  man  appeared  who  possessed  enthusiasm  and  brought  a 
message,  the  people  flocked  to  hear  him.  When  he  told  his 
hearers  what  Christ  had  commanded  them  to  do,  some  among 
them  were  always  ready  to  obey  the  command. 

The  Church  finally  awoke  to  these  facts.  The  Papal  Curia 
was  convinced  that  if  the  dangerous  growth  of  heresy  were  to 
be  checked  the  Church  must  appeal  to  the  people  through  the 
enthusiasm  for  primitive  Christianity  and  evangelical  poverty, 
which  was  carrying  thousands  into  the  ranks  of  heresy.  Then 
began  a  consistent  effort  to  enlist  under  the  banner  of  the 
Church  apostles  of  primitive  Christianity,'  and  of  these  apostles 
St.  Francis  is  the  chief  in  beauty  of  life,  in  power  over  the 
masses,  in  influence  upon  the  age.  Of  that  age  he  is  a  true 
child,  and  a  study  of  the  primitive  Christians  who  preceded  him 
may  throw  some  light  upon  the  movement  he  inspired. 

'  For  attempts  of  the  Curia  to  secure  the  adherence  of  the  Humiliati  and  the  branch 
of  the  Waldenses  known  as  the  Poor  Catholics,  see  below.  Note  also  the  sig- 
nificant story  of  Diego  of  Osna  and  St.  Dominic,  who  found  themselves  utterly 
unsuccessful  in  combating  heresy  until  they,  like  the  heretical  preachers,  stood  before 
the  people  in  the  guise  of  simplicity  and  poverty.  See  Guillelmis  de  Podio  Laurentii, 
Historia  Albigensiuniy  c.  8  (Ann.  1206).     Bouquet,  vol.  xix,  p.  200. 


CHAPTER  II 
Apostolic  Sects  Allied  to  the  Cathari. 

The  Cathari  were  the  arch-heretics  of  the  Middle  Ages  ;  they 
are  best  known  to  the  general  student  of  European  history 
through  the  successful  attempt  of  Simon  de  Montfort  to  exter- 
minate the  powerful  commiunity  of  them  known  as  the  Albi- 
genses.  Their  belief  was  a  form  of  dualism,  and  they  were 
manifestations  of  the  great  Manichaean  movement  which  seems 
to  have  traveled  from  the  East,  perhaps  originally  from  Persia, 
westward  into  the  African  and  European  provinces  of  the 
Roman  Empire. ' 

The  first  great  wave  of  Manichaeism  swept  over  southern 
Europe  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  The  Emperor  Valen- 
tinian  discovered  it  in  Italy,  and  in  372  found  it  necessary  to 
forbid  the  meetings  of  Manichaeans.^  Later  emperors  issued 
stringent  decrees  against  these  heretics.  Their  belief  was  de- 
clared to  be  a  public  crime,  and  ferocious  laws  were  enacted  to 
secure  the  extermination  of  the  faith  and  of  its  adherents.3  In 
spite,  however,  of  all  the  proceedings  against  the  Manichaeans 
their  number  grew.  About  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  Pope 
Leo  the  Great  discovered  an  alarmingly  strong  community  of 
them  in  Rome.  He  preached  against  them,  and  caused  them  to 
be  condemned  by  a  synod  and  banished  by  the  Senate.  For 
the  time  the  movement  was  checked  in  Rome.* 

The  efforts  of  Leo  resulted  not  in  exterminating  the  heretics, 

'  C,  Schmidt,  Histoire  des  Cathares,  vol.  i,  pp.  1-8,  and  authorities  there  cited. 
Cf.  Real  Encyclopaedie,  vol.  xiii,  p.  762. 

'  Cod.  Theod.,  lib.  xvi,  tit.  5,  1.  3. 

'Theodosius  the  Great,  in  381,  382,  389.  Ibid.,  tit.  5,  1.  7,  9,  18.  Honorius,  in 
399,  405,  408.  Ibid.,  1.  33,  40,  43.  Theodosius  II,  in  423,  425,428.  Ibid,,  1  59, 
62,  65. 

*C.  Schmidt,  ibid.,  p.  17. 
16 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI 


17 


but  in  dispersing  them,  to  form  elsewhere  centres  for  the  pro- 
mulgation of  their  doctrine.  Effective  persecution  was  then, 
and  for  a  long  time  afterward,  impossible  to  the  Popes;  the 
organization  of  judicial  machinery  for  the  extirpation  of  heresy- 
was  not  to  be  achieved  for  some  centuries. 

It  is  then  not  strange  that  Manichaeans  were  discovered  at 
Ravenna  in  550  and  at  Rome  by  various  Popes  between  Leo  I 
and  Gregory  I.  The  latter  made  earnest  efforts  to  root  out  the 
heresy ;  he  issued  emphatic  commands  to  Bishops  in  whose  dio- 
ceses it  was  known  to  exist,  adjuring  them  to  exterminate  it.^ 

For  more  than  four  hundred  years  after  Gregory's  death 
there  is  no  evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  dualistic  heresy  in 
Europe.  It  must,  however,  have  existed  and  grown  below  the 
surface  of  society,  for  early  in  the  eleventh  century  it  was  so  for- 
midable as  to  invite  persecution  in  northern  Italy  and  southern 
France.''  Beginning  with  the  year  1012  there  are  various  ac- 
counts of  the  discovery  of  dualists  and  of  edicts  against  them.? 

The  tenets  which  attracted  the  attention  of  the  clergy  were : 
denial  of  the  efificacy  of  the  Mass,  of  the  baptism  of  infants, 
and  of  the  intercession  of  saints ;  and  refusal  to  venerate  the 
Cross.  When  their  manner  of  life  was  questioned,  it  was 
found  that  they  considered  marriage  sinful,  and  that  they 
would  not  use  as  food  milk,  nor  anything  made  from  it,  because 
of  the  connection  of  milk  with  the  function  of  generation.  By 
these  signs  the  Manichaeans  were  always  recognized.  They 
were  called  by  various  names  during  the  centuries  in  which  this 
form  of  belief  was  to  the  Church  an  ever  present  and  malignant 
foe;   but  whether    known   as    Manichaeans,  Cathari,  or  mem- 

^  For  all  this  early  movement,  see  C.  Schmidt,  idid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  1-18. 

*  See  Schmidt,  Hid.,  pp.  24  Jif^. 

'Schmidt,  idi'd.,  pp.  24  seg.  Among  the  accounts  are:  for  Limoges  (1012),  Ade- 
-  mari  Hisioriarum  libri  III,  lib.  iii,  c.  69.  M.  G.  H.  SS. ,  vol.  iv,  p.  148.  The 
same  source  furnishes  accounts  of  the  discovery  of  Manichaeans,  at  Aries  {ibid.,  p. 
143),  and  at  Toulouse,  /.  c.  For  further  account  of  the  heresy  in  Aries,  see  Radulfi 
Glabri,  Hisioriarum  libri  V,  Hb.  iii,  c.  8.  Bouquet,  vol.  x,  p.  35.  The  Synod  of 
St.  Carroux  in  Vienne  (1028)  took  action  against  the  haretics.  Concilium  Karro- 
fense,  Mansi,  vol.  xix,  c.  485.  The  synod  held  at  Arras  in  1025  also  took  action  con- 
cerning them.     Mansi,  vol.  xix,  cc.  423  seg. 


l8        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

bers  of  the  great  Albigensian  organization,  such  adherents  of 
the  dualistic  Philosophy  were  probably  never  entirely  elim- 
inated from  mediaeval  Europe. 

The  form  of  dualism  which  was  most  prevalent  recognized 
"  two  co-equal  principles,  God  and  Satan,  of  whom  the  former 
created  the  invisible,  spiritual,  and  eternal  universe,  the  latter 
the  material  and  temporal,  which  he  governs.  Satan  is  the 
Jehovah  of  the  Old  Testament ;  the  prophets  and  patriarchs 
are  robbers,  and,  consequently,  all  Scripture  anterior  to  the 
Gospels  is  to  be  rejected.  The  New  Testament,  however,  is 
Holy  Writ,  but  Christ  was  not  a  man,  but  a  phantasm — the  Son 
of  God  who  appeared  to  be  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  came 
from  Heaven  to  overthrow  the  worship  of  Satan."'  "The 
Church  was  the  synagogue  of  Satan,  and  all  its  rites  were 
futile  or  worse  than  futile.  Asceticism  and  the  prohibition  of 
marriage  were  logical  consequences  of  a  belief  which  recog- 
nized the  body  as  the  handiwork  and  servant  of  Satan,  hamper- 
ing and  striving  to  ruin  the  soul,  the  child  of  God."  ^ 

The  Church  having  been  repudiated,  the  dualists  formed 
their  own  organization,  their  own  hierarchy.  They  themselves, 
forming  the  Church  of  Christ,  had,  they  believed,  the  power  to 
"  bind  and  loose,"  to  reconcile  the  sinner  with  God,  which  had 
been  given  by  Christ  to  the  Apostles,  and  was  the  basis  of  the 
power  of  the  Church  over  the  people.  Admission  to  their  sect 
was  conferred  through  the  Co7isolamentum,  or  laying  on  of 
hands,  by  which  sin  was  wiped  out  and  the  Holy  Spirit  entered 
into  the  aspirant.^ 

It  is,  however,  the  concrete  facts  of  the  lives  of  these  people 
together  with  their  opposition  to  the  Church,  which  are  formu- 
lated and  discussed  by  persecutors  and  writers  against  heresy. 
The  philosophy  on  which  their  system  was  based  is  often  not 
alluded  to  at  all.  Perhaps  the  subtleties  of  the  doctrine  were 
not  understood  by  the  great  body  of  the  Cathari.  So  philo- 
sophical  and   intellectual  a  creed  as  the   Catharan  version  of 

^  Lea,  Inquisition,  vol.  i,  pp.  24  seq. 

'Lea,  ibid.,  pp.  93  seq.      Cf.  Real  Encyclopaedie,  vol.  xiii,  pp.  762  seq. 

*  Lea,  ibid..^  pp.  93  seq.     Cf.  Schmidt,  /.  c. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI  iq 

dualism  could  hardly  have  won  converts  in  numbers  sufficient 
to  enable  Catharism  to  supplant  the  Church  in  southern  France 
and  to  weaken  it  seriously  elsewhere.  Probably  the  Catharan 
preachers  who  sought  converts  emphasized  the  asceticism  which 
grew  out  of  their  creed  and  drew  a  contrast  with  the  worldliness 
of  the  clergy.  Condemnation  of  the  clergy  was  a  not  unpopu- 
lar pose  in  the  eleventh,  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries,  and 
the  Cathari  explicitly  and  implicitly  attacked  the  clergy.  Ex- 
hortation to  simple,  pure  lives,  such  as  Christ  enjoined  upon  the 
first  Christians,  aroused  popular  enthusiasm.  As  will  be  shown 
later,'  appeals  to  the  people  were  made  by  some  dualists  on 
grounds  similar  to  those  of  Arnold,  of  Waldo,  of  Francis ;  that 
the  perfect  life  consists  in  literal  obedience  to  the  commands 
of  Christ ;  that  their  own  duty  lay  in  an  attempt  to  revive  the 
primitive  Church. 

So  some  of  the  Cathari,  or  of  enthusiasts  who  were  affiliated 
with  them,  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  essay,  though  the  great 
Catharan  movement  as  a  whole  lies  outside  it.  The  line  be- 
tween the  Catharan  sects  and  other  heretical  bodies  is  not 
always  easy  to  draw,  because,  as  has  been  said,  the  dualistic 
basis  of  their  belief  is  not  always  formulated.  Popular  preach- 
ers now  and  then  arose  whose  doctrines  savored  of  Catharism 
so  strongly  in  their  tangible  characteristics  that  it  seems  impos- 
sible they  can  have  sprung  from  any  other  root  than  that  of 
dualism.  Such  leaders  were  Peter  of  Bruys  and  his  co-worker 
Henry  of  Lausanne.  These  men  preached  mainly  in  southern 
France,  between  1106  and  11 34,  where,  as  has  been  shown, 
Catharism  had  been  discovered  and  condemned  a  century 
before.^  It  had  meantime,  working  under  the  surface,  grown  in 
strength.3  It  was  only  to  be  exterminated  a  century  and  a  half 
later  by  a  bloody  war. 

Peter  and  Henry  were  unquestionably  Cathari,  but  they 
appealed  to  the  people  who  thronged  to  hear  them  on  grounds 
far  more  tangible — they  preached  apostolic  Christianity.  "  They 
say  in  their  sermons  that  Christ  sent  his  apostles  forth  to  preach, 

'  See  below,  pp.  22  seq.  '  See  above,  pp.  17. 

^  Schmidt,  ibid.,  p.  28. 


20        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

for  he  says  in  the  Gospel :  '  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach 
the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  Whosoever  shall  believe  you  and 
be  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;  but  whosoever  shall  not  believe  you 
shall  be  condemned.'  "  ' 

The  conditions  under  which  Peter  of  Bruys  began  his  mission 
are  unknown,  beyond  the  fact  that  he  was  convinced  he  was 
following  Christ  because  Christ  laid  commands  upon  him  as  he 
had  done  upon  the  twelve.'^  Like  many  another  apostle  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  he  comes  suddenly  into  the  light  of  history,  plays 
for  a  brief  space  a  stormy  part,  fleeing  hither  and  thither  before 
persecution,  and  does  not  cease  to  cry  out  his  message  until  he 
is  silenced  in  the  fierce  glare  of  a  martyr's  pyre  (i  126). 3  Henry 
of  Lausanne  seems  to  have  been  aroused  by  Peter's  preaching. 
Like  Peter,  he  was  persecuted.  His  life  ended  not  at  the  stake 
but  in  prison.'* 

The  teaching  of  the  two  men  was  the  same  in  all  essentials. 
There  are  several  statements,  contemporary  or  nearly  so,  of 
their  doctrines.  Their  principal  tenets  are  these :  they  denied 
the  efficacy  of  infant  baptism  because  Christ  said,  "  Believe  and 
be  baptized,"  and  a  child  cannot  believe ;  Christ's  body  and 
blood  are  not  offered  in  the  Sacrament,  nor  did  God  command 
that  the  Sacrament  be  celebrated ;  all  sacrifices  and  prayers  for 
the  dead  avail  nothing ;  churches  and  altars  are  unnecessary,  for 
prayer  before  a  stable  is  as  efficacious  as  that  before  an  altar. 
Further,  they  did  not  venerate  the  cross,  but  execrated  it  as  the 
symbol  of  Christ's  torture.^  Except  that  the  baptism  of  adults 
is  not  expressly  denounced,  these  doctrines  are  Catharan.  They 
result  in  pruning  away  many  rites  of  the  Church  of  post-apos- 

'  Petri  Venerabilis,  Traciaius  adv.  Pctrobrusianos  Haereticos,  B.  M.  P.  Lugd., 
vol.  xxii,  p.  1036. 

^Lea,  ibid.,  p.  68. 

'Petri  Venerabilis  Traciaius  adv.  Petrobrusianos  Haereticos,  B.  M.  P.  Lugd.,  vol. 
xxii,  pp.  1033  seq.  See  also  Lea,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  68.  .St.  Bernardi,  Epistolae,  241, 
242.     Opera,  vol.  i,  pp.  237-239. 

^  Actus  Pontificum  Cetiomannis.  De  Hildeberto  (Bishop  in  1097).  In  Mabillon, 
Vetera  Analecta,  pp.  315  seq.  led.  1723).  Bouquet,  vol.  xii,  p.  547.  Chronica 
Alberici  Monachi  7'rium  Fontium.     M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  840  seq. 

*Petr.,  Ven.,  /.  c.     Act.  Pont.  Cen.,  I.  c. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI  2 1 

tolic  origin.  There  is  scant  positive  evidence  to  show  whether 
this  return  to  apostolic  conditions  was  conscious.  There  is, 
however,  presumptive  evidence  for  the  conclusion  that  these 
heresiarchs  had  compared  the  existing  Church  with  the  early- 
Christian  community  and  were  trying  to  do  away  with  the  rites 
and  doctrines  instituted  after  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  Age, 
and  to  conform  the  clergy  to  the  model  established  by  Christ. 
For  the  heresiarchs  were  evidently  convinced  that  they  them- 
selves were  apostles  of  Christ,  preaching  because  He  had  com- 
manded his  apostles  to  preach,  and  their  doctrine  of  baptism 
was  founded  on  Christ's  words.  In  no  other  case  have  their 
arguments  in  support  of  a  tenet  been  directly  reported. 

There  is  fuller  evidence  of  the  apostolic  character  of  a  body 
of  heretics  discovered  at  Cologne  between  11 44  and  11 47; 
and  these  were  apparently  Petrobrusian.'  They  were  found 
about  twenty  years  after  the  martyrdom  of  Peter,  while  Henry 
was  dying  in  prison  at  Rheims,  by  Everwin,  Provost  of  Stein- 
feld,  who  wrote  an  account  of  them  to  St.  Bernard,  and  begged 
the  great  Crusader  to  preach  against  them.''  St.  Bernard  ac- 
ceded to  Everwin's  request,  and  attacked  the  heretics  in  ques- 
tion in  two  sermons.3  These  sermons  follow  closely  the  account 
furnished  by  Everwin,  and  therefore  give  little  additional  infor- 
mation about  the  heretics  of  Cologne.  The  important  source 
is  then  the  letter  of  Everwin.  His  account  reads  like  an  ex- 
pansion of  Peter  the  Venerable's  digest  of  the  Petrobrusian 
heresy. 

The   heretics   of   Cologne,   like    Peter   and   Henry,   rejected 

^  Heal  Encyclopaedie,,  vol.  i,  pp.  701  seq.  Kirchen  Lexicon,  vol.  i,  p.  1 142. 
Lea,  Inquisition,  vol.  i,  pp.  68-72.     Tocco,  I'Eresia  71  el  medio  evo,  p.  164. 

'  Evervini  Stein feldensis  Praepositis,  Epistola  ad  S.  Bernardutn  abbatem,  De  Haer- 
eticis  sui  temporis.  In  Mabillon,  Vetera  Analecta,  p.  473  (ed.  1723).  HiiHer,  in 
Historisches  Jahrbuch  der  Gorres-Gesellschaft,  for  1889,  p.  765,  note  4,  says  that  the 
trial  of  these  heretics  cannot  have  been  earlier  than  1147,  because  the  letter  suggests 
a  personal  acquaintance  between  Everwin  and  Bernard  hardly  likely  to  have  been 
formed  before  the  latler's  journey  to  Germany  in  1 147.  Cf.  Wurm,  Der  Heilige 
Bernard,  p    62. 

*  S.  Bernardi,  Serviottes  In  Cantica,  nos.  65  and  66.  Opera  Omnia  (ed.  Mabillon, 
1690),  vol.  i,  cc.  1490  seq. 


22        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

infant  baptism,  and  for  the  same  reason.  They  condemned 
entirely  all  the  sacraments  except  baptism.  They  were  con- 
vinced that  the  Church  had  lost  its  primitive  character,  and  had 
thus  ceased  to  be  the  Church  of  Christ.  "  They  say  that  all 
the  priests  of  the  Church  are  not  consecrated ;  for  the  apostolic 
dignity,  so  they  say,  has  been  corrupted  because  the  clergy 
have  been  involved  in  secular  business.  He  who  sits  in  the 
chair  of  Peter  is  no  soldier  of  God  like  Peter,  and  has  deprived 
himself  of  the  power  which  Peter  had  in  so  great  a  degree,  and 
he  has  it  not  at  all.  The  Archbishops  and  Bishops  who  in  the 
Church  lead  secular  lives  do  not  receive  from  the  Pope  power 
to  consecrate  others.  This  belief  they  base  on  the  words  of 
Christ,  '  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sit  in  the  seat  of  Moses.' "  ' 
"They  do  not  believe  in  prayers  for  the  dead;  they  hold  that 
fasts  and  other  methods  of  mortifying  the  flesh  imposed  for  sin 
are  unnecessary  for  the  just  and  even  for  sinners.  For  '  in 
whatsoever  day  a  sinner  shall  repent,  all  his  sins  shall  be  re- 
mitted unto  Him.'  All  the  observances  of  the  Church  which 
were  not  founded  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles  in  direct  succes- 
sion from  Him  they  call  superstitions.  They  do  not  admit  that 
there  is  Purgatorial  fire  after  death ;  but  hold  that  the  souls  of 
men  when  they  go  forth  from  the  body  pass  at  once  either  into 
eternal  rest  or  everlasting  punishment.  So  they  count  as  of  no 
avail  prayers  and  offerings  of  the  faithful  for  the  dead."  ^ 
Further,  they  deny  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  made  on  the  altar. 
So  far  their  doctrine  is  quite  clearly  the  result  of  a  desire  to 
restore  the  simplicity  and  purity  of  the  primitive  Church — they 
were  then  apostolic  heretics.  They  show  also  traces  of  Cath- 
arism :  for  "  they  call  all  marriage  fornication  unless  it  be  con- 
tracted between  two  virgins,  man  and  woman.  They  derive 
this  doctrine  from  the  words  of  Christ,  with  which  he  answered 

»  Evervini,  Ep.  ad  S.  Bern.,  ibid.,  p.  474.  Cf.  this  attack  upon  the  worldly  clergy 
with  the  accounts  of  the  effect  of  Henry's  preaching  at  Le  Mans:  '« Qua  haeresi 
plebs  in  clerum  versa  est  in  furorem,  adeo  quod  famulis  eorum  minarentur  cruciatus, 
nee  eis  aliquid  vendere,  vel  ab  eis  emere  voluissent;  immo  habebant  eos  sicut  ethnicos 
et  publicanos  etc."     Actus  Pontificum  Cenomannis.     In  Mabillon,   Vetera  Analecia, 

P-3I5- 

'  Ep.  Evervini,  ibid.,  p.  474. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI  27, 

the  Pharisees :  Whom  God  hath  joined  together,  let  no  man  put 
asunder."'  They  were  not  strict  Cathari,  or  they  would  not 
have  sanctioned  marriage  under  any  conditions.  Moreover, 
they  cited  the  Old  Testament  in  proof  of  their -doctrine  of  im- 
mediate reward  or  punishment  after  death ;  ^  and  the  Cathari 
usually  rejected  the  Old  Testament  altogether.  So  far  as 
Everwin's  information  went,  they  had  no  hierarchy.  "  They 
hold  our  Pope  of  no  account,"  he  says,  "  but  they  do  not  say 
that  they  have  any  other  besides  him ;  "  3  and  the  Cathari  had 
their  own  hierarchy.  Nevertheless,  the  heretics  of  Cologne 
must  be  counted  among  the  sects  which  were  allied  with  the 
Cathari,  and  probably  owed  their  origin  to  Peter  of  Bruys.'* 
It  was,  however,  through  their  attempt  to  restore  the  apostolic 
Church  that  they  gained  their  hold  on  the  popular  imagination. 
Contemporary  with  these  last  reformers  were  others,  who 
called  themselves  "Apostolics."  They,  too,  were  discovered  at 
Cologne  by  Everwin.  He,  in  describing  the  new  heretics,  who 
he  says  had  everywhere  "boiled  up  from  the  depth  of  hell,"s 
distinguishes  two  classes  "  detected  through  their  mutual  dis- 
agreement and  contention."  One  class  has  already  been  dis- 
cussed ;  the  second,  according  to  Everwin,  disagree  with  these 
altogether.  This  is  perhaps  too  strong  a  statement,  but  the 
Apostolics  are  more  clearly  Catharan  than  the  other  heretics 
described  by  Everwin.     "They  said  in  their  own  defense  that 

'  Ep.  Evervini,  /.  c, 

*  Purgatorium  ignem  post  mortem  non  concedunt:  sed  animas  statim,  quando  egre- 
diuntur,  de  corpore  in  aeternam  vel  requiem  vel  poenam  transire  propter  ilia  Sala- 
monis,  "  Lignum  in  quamcumque  partem  ceciderit,  sive  ad  Austrum,  sive  ad  Aquil- 
onem,  ibi  manebit,"  /.  c. 

SZ.  c. 

*  It  is,  however,  possible  that  the  doctrine  of  Tanchelm  may  have  spread  to  Col- 
ogne and  aided  in  the  formation  of  these  sects.  Tanchelm  was  a  layman  of  Antwerp, 
who  denied  the  ability  of  sinful  priests  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and  said  that 
any  good  man  might  administer  them;  that  his  followers  were  the  church;  that  tithes 
should  not  be  given  to  the  clergy,  etc.  See  Tocco,  idid.,  pp.  157  se</.  Epistola 
Trajectensis  Ecclesiae  ad  Federicum  Archiepiscopum  Colonietisem  (1112).  In 
D'Argentr6,  Coll.  Jud.,  vol.  i,  p.  11.  Vita  Norberti,  c.  16.  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol. 
xii,  pp.  690-691. 

'Ep.    Evervini.,  tiid.,  p.  474. 


24 


SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 


this  heresy  had  existed  secretly  from  the  time  of  the  martyrs  to 
our  own  day,  and  had  persisted  in  Greece  and  some  other  lands."  ' 
As  has  been  said,  this  tradition  of  antiquity  and  of  eastern  origin 
is  common  to  all  Catharan  sects.^ 

Whatever  the  remote  origin  of  their  philosophy  may  have 
been,  however,  the  Apostolics  of  Cologne,  like  Arnold  and 
Waldo,  were  inspired  by  the  contrast  between  the  Roman  hier- 
archy and  the  primitive  Church  to  make  an  effort  after  reform. 
"  You,"  they  told  Everwin,  "  add  house  to  house  and  field  to 
field.  You  seek  your  own  and  the  things  of  this  world.  Even 
those  who  are  held  most  perfect  among  you,  the  monks  and  the 
regular  canons,  though  they  do  not  hold  property  as  individuals, 
but  possess  it  in  common,  yet  have  all  things.  .  .  .  You  love  this 
world  and  are  at  peace  with  this  world  because  you  are  of  this 
world.  .  .  .  Christ  possessed  nothing  and  allowed  His  disciples 
to  possess  nothing.  .  .  .  They  say  they  are  the  Church  because 
they  alone  walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Christ  and  follow  truly  the 
apostolic  life.  They  seek  not  the  things  which  are  of  this 
world ;  they  possess  nothing,  neither  house  nor  lands  nor  any 
money,  just  as  Christ  possessed  nothing  and  allowed  His  disci- 
ples to  possess  nothing.  .  .  .  We,  they  say,  are  poor  men  of 
Christ,  having  no  permanent  abiding  place,  fleeing  from  city  to 
city ;  like  sheep  in  the  midst  of  wolves,  we  suffer  persecution  3 
with  the  apostles  and  martyrs.  Yet  we  lead  a  life  holy  and 
very  strict,  persisting  in  fasting  and  abstinence,  in  prayers  and 
labors  day  and  night,  seeking  only  the  necessities  of  life  from 
our  followers.*  All  these  things  we  bear  because  we  are  not  of 
this  world.  Pseudo-apostles  have  misinterpreted  the  word  of 
Christ,  and  have  sought  their  own,  and  have  made  you  and 
your  fathers  proud  and  worldly.     We  and  our  fathers  are  born 

*  Cf.  St.  Bernard,  "Nee  enim  in  cunctis  assertionibus  eoriim  (nam  multae  sunt), 
novum  quid  aut  inauditum  audisse  me  recolo,  sed  quod  tritum  est,  et  diu  ventilatum 
inter  antiques  haereticos,  a  nostris  autem  contritum  et  eventilatum."  Serm.  In  Can- 
tica,  65,  par.  8.     Opera,  ed.  Mabillon,  vol.  i,  cc.  1493. 

*  See  above,  pp.  16. 

*  There  is  no  record  of  this  persecution,  unless  it  be  the  effort  to  extirpate  Cathar- 
ism  in  ?"rance,  to  which  reference  has  been  made  above. 

*  "  Tantum  necessaria  ex  eis  vitae  quaerentes,"  /.  c. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI 


25 


of  the  apostles.  We  have  remained  in  the  grace  of  Christ,  and 
we  will  so  remain  until  the  end  of  the  world.  To  separate  you 
from  us,  Christ  said  :  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.  Our 
fruits  are  the  foot-prints  of  Christ."  ' 

One  of  their  tenets  then  was  evangelical  poverty — literal 
destitution,  according  to  the  command  given  by  Christ  to  His 
disciples.  They  not  only  believed  that  they  were  bound  to  live 
in  utter  poverty ;  they  carried  the  doctrine  to  its  logical  con- 
clusion :  a  hierarchy  which  did  not  obey  literally  this  command 
given  by  Christ  to  the  group  of  men  from  whom  that  hierarchy 
claimed  to  derive  its  authority,  was  not  the  Church  of  Christ  at 
all.  They  made  then  the  deduction  which  Arnold  and  Waldo 
made,  and  which  Francis  never  made.  Repudiating  the  Church 
of  Rome,  they  had  organized  a  church  of  their  own. 

They  did  not  copy  the  simple  democracy  of  the  early 
Church.  They  seem  to  have  had  no  doubt  that  Christ  founded 
a  hierarchy  not  dissimilar  to  that  of  the  debased  Roman 
Church ;  that  He  instituted  sacraments  of  which  Baptism  and 
the  Mass  as  administered  by  that  Church  were  a  travesty. 
"They  have  their  own  Pope,"  says  Everwin ;  '  "one  of  those 
captured  was  a  Bishop,"  3  and  there  were  among  them  simple 
hearers  (auditores),  "who  may,  by  receiving  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  become  believers  (credentes)."  ■»  This  sounds  like  the 
Catharan  organization. 

As  to  the  sacraments,  Everwin  believed  that  they  accepted 
adult  baptism,  and  that  they  were  given  to  consecrating  their 
food  and  drink,  in  obedience  to  the  words  of  Christ  at  the  Last 
Supper.  Their  attitude  toward  baptism  cannot,  however,  be 
exactly  determined.  Whether  they  really  did  believe  in  adult 
baptism,  or  whether  Everwin  was  led  by  their  purposely  equi- 
vocal statements  to  think  that  they  did,  one  thing  is  certain: 
full  membership  in  their  sect  was  conferred  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands.     This  rite,  they  claimed,  was  instituted  by  Christ.     It 

'  Evemni,  idtd.,  p.  473.  *  Evcrvini,  iiid.,  p.  474. 

'Evervini,  ii>ie/.,  p.  473. 

*Evervini,  Hid.,  p.  474.  C/.  St.  Bernardi,  Senn.  In  Caniica,  wo.  6C),  ibid.,  c. 
1491. 


26        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

was  that  "  baptism  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire  "  which 
John  the  Baptist  promised  would  be  given  by  the  One  mightier 
than  he  who  was  to  come  after  him.  In  the  baptism  of  Paul, 
according  to  Luke's  account,  no  water  was  used ;  and  "  what- 
ever is  found  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  about  the  laying  on 
of  hands,  they  would  apply  to  this  baptism."  '  This  ceremony 
is  characteristically  Catharan. 

Like  the  Cathari,  the  Apostolics  were  accustomed  to  conse- 
crate all  food  and  drink  at  their  daily  meals,  following  the  cus- 
tom of  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  The  consecration  was  effected 
by  means  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  as  was  the  custom  of  many 
Cathari.  The  food  and  drink  were  consecrated  "  in  corpus 
CJiristi  et  sanguinem^'  and  the  Apostolics  believed  "  ut  inde  se 
membra  et  corpus  Christi  nutriant."  "^  These  statements  may 
indicate  belief  in  transubstantiation.  If  this  be  true,  then  the 
Apostolics  were  not  genuine  Cathari ;  for  the  Cathari  believed 
that  Christ  "was  not  a  man,  but  a  phantasm."  3  On  the  other 
hand,  Everwin  may  have  given  undue  significance,  drawn  from 
the  doctrines  in  which  he  himself  believed,  to  a  rite  very  simple, 
really  apostolic,  which  he  was  incapable  of  understanding. 

True  Cathari  these  men  may  or  may  not  have  been,  but  Apos- 
tolics they  clearly  were.  For  they  founded  their  customs  on 
their  literal  interpretation  of  the  commands  of  Christ  and  the 
usage  of  the  apostles.  They  may  have  been  Cathari  who  dif- 
fered from  the  body  of  their  brethren  in  their  effort  to  restore 
primitive  Christianity  through  evangelical  poverty.  All  branches 
of  the  sect  believed  that  they  were  of  apostolic  origin  and  char- 

^Z.  c.  The  question  of  their  belief  in  adult  baptism,  like  that  regarding  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  concerns  inquirers  who  would  establish 
their  relation  with  the  Catharan  movement.  This  essay  is  concerned  with  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Apostolics  of  Cologne  with  the  movement  to  revive  primitive  Christianity 
and  apostolic  poverty. 

^L.c. 

'See  above.  There  is  ground  for  assuming  that  Everwin  thought  the  Apos- 
tohcs  did  believe  in  transubstantiation;  for,  after  describing  them,  he  turns  to 
his  "  other  heretics  "  with  the  words:  "  Omnino  ab  istis  discordantes.  .  .  .  Isti  ne- 
gant  in  altari  fieri  corpus  Christi  eo  quod  omnes  sacerdotes  ecclesiae  non  sunt  conse- 
crati."    L.  c. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI  27 

acter,  and  that  the  Papacy  had  lost  the  apostolic  spirit  and 
power  which  it  once  possessed.  This  loss  they  connected  with 
the  false  Donation  of  Constantine  the  Great,  by  which,  accord- 
ing to  mediaeval  belief,  temporal  power  over  Italy  was  conferred 
upon  Pope  Sylvester.  The  Cathari  believed  that  the  Church 
was  perverted  by  the  possession  of  temporal  wealth  and  power, 
and  ceased  from  that  time  to  be  the  Church  of  Christ,  "  and 
they  say  that  the  blessed  Sylvester  was  Antichrist."  ^ 

This  belief  in  their  own  apostolic  character  might  easily  be 
emphasized  in  the  minds  of  some  members  of  the  Catharan 
body  and  develop  into  the  strictly  apostolic  doctrine  of  the 
heretics  of  Cologne.*  On  the  other  hand,  a  company  of  men 
who  set  out  independently  to  lead  a  life  conformed  to  the 
usages  of  the  apostolic  Church  might  find  in  the  Catharan  belief 
in  their  own  apostolic  origin  a  common  ground  on  which  to 
meet.  Indeed,  in  districts  permeated  by  Catharism,^  as  much 
of  western  Europe  seems  to  have  been  at  this  time,  such  men 
would  be  drawn  both  by  the  logic  of  their  reasoning  and  by  the 
pressure  of  events  toward  the  Catharan  organization. 

On  the  whole,  however,  the  Apostolics  of  Cologne  are  most 
easily  accounted  for  on  the  assumption  that  they  were  a  branch 
of  the  Cathari,  and  had,  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the 
age,  become  enthusiasts  for  evangelical  poverty,  without  sever- 
ing their  connection  with  the  great  body  of  the  Dualists.  Sev- 
eral circumstances  point  to  this  conclusion.  They  do  not  speak 
of  a  heresiarch,  and  usually  a  sect  begins  with  adherence  to  a 
leader.  They  refer  to  persecutions  endured;  and  no  such 
persecution  is  known  to  have  taken  place,  beyond  the  attempts 
to  put  down  Catharism,  and  the  proceedings  against  Peter  of 

'  Evervini,  /.  c.  For  a  more  detailed  account  of  the  Sylvester  legend,  and  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Donation  of  Constantine  on  heresy  in  mediaeval  Europe,  see  Comba, 
Histoire  des  Vatidois,  pp.  77  seq. 

■■•This  is  the  theory  of  Tocco.  See  L'Eresia  nel  medio  evo,  p.  163.  There  are  no 
detailed  treatises  on  the  Apostolics,  and  it  is  therefore  impnsMlile  to  refer  to  sec- 
ondary authorities  on  points  which  lie  outside  the  scope  of  this  essay. 

'On  Catharism  in  Cologne,  see  Schmidt,  ibid.,  pp.  94  seq.  Also  Annales  Colo- 
metises  Maximi  (Anno  1163),  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xvii  p.  778,  for  account  of 
influx  of  Cathari  from  Flanders. 


28        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

Bruys  and  Henry  of  Lausanne  and  their  followers.'  Whatever 
their  origin,  they  had  Catharan  beliefs,  and  they  were,  as  they 
called  themselves,  ApostoHcs. 

They  also  knew  how  to  die.  "  They  were  seized  against  our 
will  by  an  over-zealous  populace,"  says  Everwin,  "  and  put 
upon  the  fire  and  burned.  What  is  more  marvellous,  they 
entered  the  fire  and  bore  the  torture  not  only  with  patience  but 
with  joy.  Whence,"  he  naively  inquires,  "  do  these  children  of 
the  devil  obtain  a  steadfastness  in  their  heresy  such  as  is 
scarcely  found  in  believers  in  the  faith  of  Christ !  "  ^ 

There  is  no  possibility  of  estimating  the  influence  and  the 
diffusion  of  the  ApostoHcs.  Their  own  statement  that  "  they 
have  a  great  multitude,  scattered  almost  everywhere  through- 
out the  world,"  may  refer  to  the  Cathari  in  general.  Heretics 
were  discovered  at  Treves  in  1122,3  at  Toul  in  1130,"*  and  in 
Champagne  in  1 144.5  In  all  these  cases,  they  were  apparently 
Cathari.  There  is  no  real  evidence  that  they  were  Apostolics,^ 
St.  Bernard  seems  to  have  heard  of  other  persecutions  of  the 
ApostoHcs  besides  those  of  which  Everwin  wrote;  but  his 
statement  is  far  too  vague  to  serve  as  evidence. ^ 

That  there  is  no  record  of  any  discovery  of  Apostolic  heretics 
in  Germany  from  the  time  of  Everwin  to  the  days  of  the  Walden- 

'  See  above,  pp.  20  se//.  ^  L.  c 

'  Gesta  Treverorutn  Episcoporum,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  viii,  p.  193. 

^  Epistolae  Hugonis  Metelli ;  Sacrae  Antiquitatis  Monumenta;  in  oppido  Sancti 
Deodati  (1731),  ep.  15,  vol.  ii,  p.  347. 

^  Ep.  Ecclesiae  Leodiensis  ad  Lucium  Papam  II,  Martene  et  Durand,  A.  C.  I., 
P-  777- 

•Of  the  heretics  of  Toul,  Hugo  writes:  "  Pestilentes  homines,  qui  veriori  nomine, 
bestiae  appellari  possunt,  quae  bestialiter  vivunt.  Conjugium  enim  detestanlur,  bap- 
tismum  abominantur,  sacramenta  Ecclesiae  dirident,  nomen  Christianum  abhorrent," 
/,  c.      Cf.  accounts  for  Treves  and  Laon. 

'  "  Quaesiti  fidem,  cum  de  quibus  suspecti  videbantur,  omnia  prorsus  suo  more  ne- 
garent;  examinati  judicio  aquae,  mendaces  inventi  sunt.  Cumque  negare  non  pos- 
sent,  quippe  deprehensi,  aqua  eos  non  recipiente,  arrepto,  ut  dicilur,  freno  dentibus, 
tam  misere,  quam  libere  impietatem  non  confessi,  sed  professi  sunt,  palani  pietatem 
adstruentes,  et  pro  ea  mortem  subire  parati.  Nee  minus  parati  inferre  qui  adstabant. 
Itaque  irruens  in  eos  populus,  novos  haerelicis  suae  ipsorum  perfidiae  martyresdedit." 
Serm.  In  Caniica,  66,  par.  12.     Ibid.y  c.  1499. 


APOSTOLIC  SECTS  ALLIED  TO  THE  CATHARI  29 

sian  movement  is  no  proof  that  such  heretics  did  not  exist  there. 
The  great  prelates  of  the  Rhine  valley  were  absorbed  in  the 
struggle  which  was  vital  to  their  wealth  and  power ' — the  strife 
to  determine  the  relations  of  Church  to  Empire.  They  were 
probably  not  over-zealous  in  the  pursuit  of  heresy.  Moreover, 
detection  of  the  Apostolics  might  well  be  difficult ;  for  those 
discovered  by  Everwin  partook  of  the  Sacraments  of  the 
Church,  and  so  for  a  time  escaped  notice.^  The  secret  growth 
of  the  sect  in  the  twelfth  century  is  the  more  probable  because 
the  Church  had,  as  yet,  no  organized  system  for  ferreting  out 
heresy.  The  fact  that  the  Apostolics  are  not  mentioned  by 
name  in  the  great  works  on  heresy  written  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury :  those  of  Bonacursus,3  and  Moneta,-*  for  example,  does  not 
prove  that  the  sect  ceased  to  exist.  The  Apostolics  might 
easily  seem  indistinguishable  from  other  Cathari  on  the  one 
hand,  or  from  the  Waldenses  on  the  other.  The  same  reason- 
ing applies  to  the  absence  of  the  name  Apostolics  from  the 
Papal  and  Imperial  edicts  against  heresy,  issued  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  twelfth  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth. 
Though  there  is  no  proof  that  the  Apostolics  maintained 
themselves  and  diffused  the  "  poison  of  their  doctrine,"  it  seems 
probable  that  they  did  so,  for  the  district  •'  infected  with  their 
heresy"  was  to  be  a  fertile  ground  for  Waldensianism  forty 
years  later ;  and  the  practical  teaching  of  the  Apostolics  was 
identical  with  that  of  Waldo.  In  only  one  other  locality  did 
the  preaching  of  Waldo  gain  so  quickly  a  large  following,  and 
that  was  in  Lombardy,  where  Arnold  and  the  Humiliati  had 
aroused  an  enthusiasm  for  primitive  Christianity  and  evangelical 

•On  the  preoccupation  of  these  prelates  with  worldly  affairs,  and  the  resulting 
tendency  of  heresy  to  increase  unmolested,  see  Rohrich,  Die  Gottesfretinde  und die 
Winkeler  am  Ober  rhein,  in  Illgen's,  Zeitschrift  fUr  die  historische  Theologie,  vol.  x, 
pt.  4,  pp.  118  seq.  (1840).  For  an  interesting  contemporary  account  of  the  clergy, 
especially  in  the  diocese  of  Treves,  see  Potho  of  Prum,  De  statu  domus  Dei,  in  Bibl. 
Max.  Patrum.  Lugd.,  vol.  xxi,  pp.  489  seq. 

'St.  Bernard,  Serm.  In  Cantica,  no.  65,  par.  5. 

'  Vita  haereticorum.     D'Achery,  Spicilegium,  vol.  xiii,  p.  64. 

*  Moneta  Cremonensis  adv.  Catharos  et  Valdenses,  ed.  Rome,  1743,  by  T.  Ric- 
chinius. 


30        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

poverty.  The  Apostolics  of  Everwin  furnish  an  explanation  for 
the  wonderfully  rapid  growth  of  the  German  Waldenses  into  an 
organization  formidable  to  the  Church.  Their  creed  had  doubt- 
less lived  on,  strengthened  in  the  popular  mind  by  constant 
contemplation  of  the  wealth  and  luxury  and  absorption  in  the 
duties  and  pleasures  of  secular  rulers  which  characterized  the 
great  Prince-Bishops  of  the  Rhine  valley. 


CHAPTER  III 

ARNOLD    OF   BRESCIA 

Looked  at  in  the  large,  the  history  of  the  Church  in  the 
eleventh  century  presents  two  great  conspicuous  facts:  the 
attempt  to  define  the  relation  to  the  secular  power  in  the  Inves- 
titure struggle,  and  that  effort  to  purify  the  clergy  and  bring 
their  lives  into  conformity  with  the  apostolic  ideal  known  as  the 
Cluniac  Reform.  These  two  movements  doubtless  had  an  incal- 
culable influence  in  arousing  popular  consciousness  to  the  un- 
apostolic  condition  of  the  Church.  They  also  helped  to  pro- 
duce in  the  cities  of  northern  Italy  a  state  of  unrest  and 
confusion  which  still  further  emphasized  the  need  for  reform 
and  made  all  ecclesiastical  questions  also  political  ones.  A 
reformer  could  hardly  attack  any  ecclesiastical  evil  without 
straightway  finding  himself  at  the  head  of  a  party  in  his  own 
city  arrayed  against  a  faction  itself  headed  by  ecclesiastics.' 
The  situation  was  complicated  by  the  breach  between  Papacy 
and  Empire  and  the  warfare  between  the  adherents  of  the  two 
powers. 

The  prevailing  evils  seem  to  have  been  especially  flagrant  in 
the  Lombard  communes,  of  which  Milan  was  the  chief.'  When 
the  Synod  of  Sutri  in  1059  enunciated  the  principles  of  reform, 
the  Lombard  bishops,  who,  if  they  tried  to  enforce  the  decrees 
were  sometimes  savagely  assaulted  by  their  clergy,  found  sup- 
port among  the  people.  The  alliance  was  not  always,  however, 
between  bishops  and  people.  The  Investiture  struggle  often 
arrayed  the  commune  against  the  bishop,  inasmuch  as  the 
burghers  were  striving  after  civil  rights  and  political  independ- 
ence, and  bishops  who,  in  league  with  the  emperor,  tried  to 

^  Arialdus  at  Milan,  Arnold  at  Brescia.     See  below,  pp.  3a  seq. 
*C.  Schmidt,  Histoire  de  la  secte  des  Cathares,  p.  19. 

31 


32         SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

retain  temperal  power  became  enemies  of  the  commune.  The 
patriot  leaders  would  then  ally  themselves  with  the  papal  legates 
against  the  bishops. 

In  Milan  the  popular  party  was  known  as  the  Pataria,  and  was 
led  by  a  certain  Arialdus,  a  man  of  noble  birth  sprung  from  the 
neighborhood  of  Milan,  who  had  traveled  widely  and  studied 
much.  Perhaps  he  may  have  encountered  Hildebrand  and 
learned  at  first  hand  of  his  great  effort  to  purify  the  Church. 
At  all  events  he  had  before  his  eyes  the  ideal  of  the  evangelical 
Church,  and  he  fearlessly  called  upon  the  clergy  of  Milan  to 
give  up  their  wealth,  repent  of  their  wickedness  and  follow 
Christ  as  the  apostles  had  done.  Democrats  and  reformers 
flocked  to  his  support,  and  for  a  time  his  faction  ruled  in  Milan, 
The  Pope,  Alexander  II,  found  in  the  Pataria  a  useful  ally  in  his 
effort  to  enforce  the  Cluniac  Reform  and  in  opposing  the 
Emperor  and  the  Anti-Pope  upheld  by  the  prelates  of  Lom- 
bardy.  Simoniacal  and  married  priests  were  driven  from  their 
altars,  and  for  a  time  the  Pataria  controlled  the  city.'  When 
the  Pope's  opponents  had  been  humbled,  the  Curia  had  no  fur- 
ther need  of  the  party  of  Arialdus,  and  the  downfall  of  the 
Pataria  was  inevitable  as  soon  as  Rome  by  their  aid  had  tri- 
umphed in  Lombardy. 

But  the  principles  of  Arialdus  did  not  die  with  the  fall  of  his 
party.  The  history  of  the  communes  varied  greatly  in  details. 
In  all,  however,  there  was  strife  involving  ecclesiastial  questions, 
together  with  a  state  of  unrest  favorable  to  the  development  of 
revolutionary  sentiment,  political  and  ecclesiastical. 

One  of  the  most  turbulent  towns  in  northern  Italy  was  Brescia, 
which  then  furnished  a  vivid  example  of  the  unapostolic  condi- 
tion into  which  the  Church  had  fallen.  Despite  the  reform 
decrees,  the  clergy  were  almost  without  exception  simoniacal. 
The  evil  effect  of  the  possession  of  temporal  power  was  glar- 
ingly evident.  Though  the  city  was  nominally  governed  by  two 
consuls,  the  bishop  controlled  one-fifth  of  the  land,  which  was 

»  Hausrath,  Arfiold  von  Brescia,  p.  i.  Vita  Arialdi,  AA.  SS.  Boll.,  27  Juni,  v, 
p.  281.     Giesebrecht,  Gesckichie  der  Deutschen  Kaiserzeit,  vol.  iii,  p.  30. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  ^o 

infeudated  to  the  Church.'  Conflicts  between  the  bishop  and 
the  consuls  were  frequent.^  A  sort  of  compromise  between  the 
lay  and  clerical  authorities  is  indicated  by  a  document  of  1 127  3 
issued  by  both  together,  but  this  was  evidently  a  momentary 
agreement,  and  did  not  mean  the  end  of  the  strife. 

New  conflicts  were  imminent.  The  year  1127  saw  two  Ger- 
man kings  contending  for  the  imperial  crown;  in  1130  two 
Popes  claimed  the  Fisherman's  Chair.  Brescia  supported 
Lothair  III  and  Innocent  II  against  Conrad  III  and  Anacletus ; 
the  laity  of  Brescia,  that  is,  headed  by  the  consuls.*  The 
bishop,  Villanus,  was  a  creature  of  Anacletus,  and  bitter  strife 
existed  between  the  clergy  under  his  leadership  and  the  popular 
party.  Innocent  II  visited  Brescia  in  the  autumn  of  1 132.  He 
deposed  Villanus,  and  replaced  him  by  Manfred,  an  adherent  of 
his  own.5 

It  was  during  the  confusion  attendant  on  the  schism  of 
Anacletus  that  the  man  known  to  history  as  Arnold  of  Brescia 
first  came  into  prominence.  He  was  a  native  of  the  town,  of 
noble  family,  born  toward  the  close  of  the  eleventh  century. 
Nothing  is  known  of  the  events  of  his  early  life,  except  that  he 
had  been  ordained  "  clericus  ac  lector^  and  had  been  a  pupil  of 
Abelard.  He  was  a  man  of  affairs  rather  than  of  theories. 
We  judge  of  his  beliefs  by  his  own  acts  and  those  of  his  fol- 
lowers. According  to  all  the  accounts  extant  of  his  life,  all  the 
attacks  made  upon  him  by  his  enemies,  he  remained  always  a 
consistent  figure,  tracing  the  evils  of  the  day  to  the  wealth  and 
temporal  power  of  the  Church,  finding  a  remedy  in  a  return  to 
the  conditions  of  the  Apostolic  Age.^  There  is  no  word  of 
Arnold's  in  existence  to  show  the  process  by  which  this  con- 
viction was  formed. 

*  Odorici,  Storie  Bresciano,  vol.  iv,  pp.  237  seq. 
'Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  8.     Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  129. 
*This  document  is  given  by  Odorici,  ibid.,  vol.  v,  p.  92. 

*  Hausrath,  /.  c. 

^Hausrath,  /.  c.  Giesebrecht,  /.  c.  See  Odorici,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  pp.  240  seq.,  for 
an  account  of  Innocent's  visit.  ♦'  Innocentius  papa  Brixiam  venit  et  ejecit  Villanum 
de  episcopatu."     Annales  Brixiensis,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xviii,  p.  812. 

*  See  below,  pp.  33  seq. 


34 


SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 


Besides  Arnold's  Lombard  environment,  then,  the  only 
known  influence  in  his  early  life  is  that  of  Abelard,  during  the 
period  when  the  author  of  the  "  Sic  et  Non  "  was  living  at  the 
Paraclete.^ 

When  it  is  remembered  that  Abelard  exalted  the  province  of 
human  reason,  it  seems  probable  that  the  fearless  independence 
of  Arnold's  later  attitude  was  in  part  due  to  him.  Abelard 
had,  moreover,  spent  years  in  bitter  conflict  with  ecclesiastical 
authorities,  at  whose  hands  he  had  received  treatment  severe, 
if  not  unjust.  l\e  had  protested  against  the  disregard  of 
monastic  vows  sadly  prevalent  at  that  time.  Arnold's  hostility 
to  the  clergy,  natural  enough  in  a  citizen  of  Lombardy,  may 
well  have  been  stimulated  by  Abelard.  Further,  the  beauty  of 
the  simple  life  at  the  Paraclete  must  have  had  its  effect  on  a 
man  of  ascetic  tendencies.  That  Arnold  was  devoted  to 
Abelard,  and  therefore  likely  to  feel  his  influence  strongly,  may 
be  inferred  from  his  return  to  his  master  some  years  later."" 

Of  the  further  influences  to  which  Arnold  was  subject,  we 
know  that  he  was  "  learned  in  the  Scriptures,"  3  and  that  he  can 
hardly  have  failed  to  hear  some  Patarin  teaching.  Moreover, 
the  study  of  the  Roman  law  was  quite  general  in  Lombardy, 
and  inevitably  made  men  critical  of  the  relation  between  the 
secular  and  the  ecclesiastical  power.* 

The  Church  as  Arnold  saw  it  in  Lombardy  bore  little  re- 
semblance to  the  Church  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  and  the  clergy 
did  not  conform  their  lives  to  the  commands  of  Christ  which 

*  V.  Clavel  [Arnauld de  Brescia,  pp.  28-29),  gives  exaggerated  importance  to  the 
influence  of  Abelard's  "Nee  credi  posse  aliquid  nisi  primitus  intellectum  "  For  an 
account  of  Abelard's  life  down  to  this  period,  see  J.  McCabe,  Life  of  Abelard,  pp. 
1-207. 

'  See  below,  pp.  35  seq. 

* Historia  Pontificalis,  c.  31;  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  537.  [Believed  to  have 
been  written  by  John  of  Salisbury,  who  was  with  Arnold  in  Paris,  under  Abelard,  and 
in  Italy  during  the  Roman  crisis.  Giesebrecht,  Arnold,  pp.  4,  124-126;  Hausrath, 
p.  4;  Pauli,  Ueber  .  .  .  yohannes  Sarisburiensis,  in  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchenrecht, 
vol.  XV,  pp.  265  seq.  ] 

*Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  129.  Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  2.  Breyer,  Die  Arnoldisten,  p. 
397.  Note  also  quotations  from  Justinian's  Institutes,  in  Wezel's  letter,  Jaffe,  B.  R. 
G.,  vol.  i,  p.  539.     For  this  letter,  see  below,  pp.  42  seq. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  ^e 

Arnold  found  in  the  Scriptures.  So  in  the  midst  of  unseemly- 
wrangles  through  which  prelates  of  the  Church  strove  to  gain 
or  to  retain  wealth  and  power,  he  began  to  cry  out  that  by  pos- 
sessing wealth  and  power  the  Church  had  departed  from  the 
way  marked  out  by  Christ  and  followed  by  the  Apostles ;  and 
that  only  by  surrendering  all  property  to  the  laity  could  the 
clergy  hope  to  be  saved.' 

With  relentless  logic,  Arnold  called  on  the  clergy  of  Brescia 
to  give  up  their  worldly  goods.  A  fresh  schism  arose.  Man- 
fred and  the  clergy  opposed  Arnold,  the  laity  supported  him. 
Popular  feeling  was  so  intense  that  during  Manfred's  sojourn  in 
Rome  in  1137,  the  citizens  of  Brescia  conspired  to  prevent  his 
return.  For  a  time  Arnold's  party  ruled  Brescia.  When,  in 
1 1 39,  Rome  condemned  Arnold,  his  ''duo  consules  haeretici" 
fell.^ 

Exiled,  Arnold  joined  Abelard,3  who,  after  an  experience  ar 
Abbot  of  St.  Gildas  in  Brittany,  made  stormy  by  his  attempt  to 
reform  the  monks,  had  returned  to  Paris  and  was  teaching  on 
Mt.  St.  Genevieve.  In  1141  St.  Bernard  declared  that  Abelard 
was  teaching  heresy,  of  which,  we  are  told,  Arnold  partook: 
"  that  new  form  of  belief,"  as  St.  Bernard  calls  it,  "  which  has 
been  devised  in  France.  Its  standpoint  toward  virtue  and  vice 
is  not  moral,  toward  the  Sacraments  not  faithful,  toward  the 
mystery  of  the  Holy  Trinity  something  quite  different  from  that 
simple  and  sober  one  to  which  we  have  been  trained."  *  Like 
Abelard,   Arnold  was    lashed    by   St.   Bernard's    denunciation. 

1  "  Dicebat  enim,  nee  clericas  proprietatem,  nee  episeopus  regalia,  nee  monachos 
possessiones  habentes,  aliqua  ratione  salvari  posse;  ciincta  haec  principis  esse,  ab  ejus- 
qiie  beneficentia  in  usum  laieorum  eedere  oportere."  Otto  Frisingensis,  Ges(a  Fri- 
derici  I,  bk.  ii,  c.  20,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  403. 

''Annales  Brixiensis,  Ann.,  1135,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xviii,  p.  812.  (Cited  by 
Giesebreeht,  p.  130.     But  the  year  is  not  that  of  Arnold's  condemnation.) 

'  St.  Bernardi,  ep.  195.  Ope}-a,  ed.  Mabillon,  vol.  i,  p.  187;  also  in  Bouquet,  vol. 
XV,  p.  575.  Walter  Map,  Be  Nugis,  D.  I,  c.  24,  ed.  Wright,  p.  43.  (Friend  of 
John  of  Salisbury,  who  wrote  during  latter  half  of  12th  century,  and  was  present  at 
3rd  Council  of  the  Lateran,  1179.  Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  155,  n,  6.  See  also  below. 
Historia  Pontificalis,  c.  31;    ibid.,  p.  537. 

*St.  Bern.,  ep.  330.     "Ad  Innocentium  Papain."     Op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  182. 


36        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  AS  SI  SI 

With    him    he   was    condemned    by    the    Council    of    Sens    in 
I141.' 

Abelard,  worn  out  by  the  labors  and  contentions  of  his 
strenuous  life,  was  persuaded  by  Peter  the  Venerable  of  Cluny 
to  make  peace  with  St.  Bernard  and  to  submit  to  the  Church.' 
Arnold  was  younger,  he  was  vigorous  and  uncompromising,  and 
he  did  not  yield. 

The  sentence  of  Sens  was  not  approved  in  France,  and  after 
the  submission  of  the  arch-heretic  no  bishop  was  found  to 
execute  the  harsh  judgment  of  the  Council  against  Arnold.  He 
was  therefore  left  unmolested  for  a  time.3  Further,  Hyacinthus, 
later  a  cardinal,  evidently  an  influential  man,  espoused  Arnold's 
cause.* 

Moreover,  conditions  in  France  were  unfavorable  to  united 
clerical  action.  A  heated  controversy  centred  around  a  bitter 
struggle  for  the  see  of  Bourges  and  diverted  attention  from  all 
minor  issues.  King  and  Pope,  noble  and  monk,  stood  arrayed 
against  each  other.  Bloodshed,  ban,  interdict,^  furnished  a 
vivid  illustration  of  Arnold's  characteristic  doctrine,  while  by 
shielding  him  from  the  punishment  decreed  at  Sens  the  strife 
made  possible  a  still  wider  promulgation  of  the  doctrine.  He 
tarried  for  a  time  in  Paris,  and  at  Mt.  St.  Genevieve  "  expounded 
sacred  letters  to  the  scholars.  What  he  said  agreed  perfectly 
with  the  laws  of  the  Christians,  but  differed  as  widely  as  possible 
from  their  lives.  He  did  not  spare  the  bishops,  because  of  their 
base  and  avaricious  greed  of  gain  and  because  of  their  impure 
lives  and  because  they  sought  to  build  the  Church  of  God  in 
blood."  ^ 

'Mansi,  vol.  xxi,  cc.  564  seq.  Cf.  St.  Bern.,  epist.  189;  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  182. 
On  Abelard's  views  condemned  at  Sens,  see  McCabe,  ibid.,  pp.  320-321,  and  S.  M. 
Deutsch,  Peter  Abelard,  pp    255-288. 

*Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  53.  Abelard  died  shortly  afterward  (April  21,  1142),  in  a 
priory  belonging  to  Cluny,  at  Chalons  siir  Saone.     McCabe,  ibid.,  p.  359. 

'Hausrath,  /.  c.     St.  Bern.,  epist.,  195. 

*St.  Bern.,  ep  180.  Op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  184.  Hyacinthus  was  with  John  of  Salis- 
bur)-,  Arnold  and  Abelard  in  Paris  in  1 136.     McCabe,  ibid.,  p.  291. 

■^Hausrath,  ibid.,  pp.  55-56. 

^ Historia  Pontificalis,  c.  31.      Ibid.,  p.  537. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  37 

Though  Pope  and  bishop  gave  no  open  sign  of  hostility,  St. 
Bernard  had  not  laid  down  his  arms.  Unable  to  secure  the 
execution  of  the  papal  verdict,  he  sought  to  drive  the  con- 
demned man  out  of  Christendom.  He  hunted  him  from  land 
to  land  by  appealing  to  any  power  he  could  influence.  He  did 
his  best  to  make  true  his  own  description  of  Arnold:  "Wher- 
ever he  has  once  set  his  foot,  thither  he  never  dares  to  return 
any  more."  '  St.  Bernard  mediated  between  the  Pope  and  the 
King  of  France  when  his  country  lay  under  an  interdict,  and  he 
finally  succeeded  in  persuading  Louis  VH  to  drive  Arnold  from 
Paris  and  from  France. 

For  a  time,  probably  about  a  year,  he  found  refuge  in  ZUrich. 
Still  he  taught  and  won  followers.*  Perhaps  the  preaching  of 
Henry  of  Lausanne  had  prepared  the  way  for  Arnold.s  To  the 
Bishop  of  Constance,  who  had  won  his  see  by  spending  large 
sums  in  Rome  during  the  very  year  (1139)  oi  Arnold's  con- 
demnation by  Innocent  H,^  St.  Bernard  sent  an  emphatic  letter 
of  warning.  Arnold,  he  said,  was  a  man  of  ingratiating  manner, 
who  never  failed  to  make  use  of  all  the  influence  he  could 
acquire  against  the  clergy.^  We  may  judge  both  of  Arnold's 
course  in  the  diocese  of  Constance  and  of  the  effect  of  this  let- 
ter by  the  fact  that  Arnold  did  not  stay  long  in  Zurich.  We 
know  also  that  he  had  preached  there  the  regeneration  of  the 
Church  by  a  return  to  the  conditions  of  the  Apostolic  Age.^ 

He  next  went  to  Guido,  the  papal  legate  in  Moravia  and 
Bohemia.9     To  Guido  also  St.  Bernard  sent  a  letter  of  warning 

>St.  Bern.,  ep.  195.      0/>.  cii.,  vol.  i,  p.  187. 

^  Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  57.     The  interdict  was  removed  by  Celestinus  II  ( 1 143-1 147)- 

»Otto  Frising.  Gesla  Frid.  I,  bk.  2,  c.  20.  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  403.  St. 
Bern.,  ep.  195.     Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  134. 

*Otto  Frising.  Ibid.,  p.  404.  Wezel  (see  bebw,  p.  42  seq.)  writing  from  Rome  in 
1 152,  recommends  to  the  Emperor  Frederick  I  "  Comitem  Rodulfum  de  Rames- 
berch,  et  Comitem  Andalricum  de  Leucenburch,  et  alios  idoneos  sciHcet  Eberardum 
de  Bodemen"  who,  Giesebrecht  (p.  133)  thinks,  were  followers  of  Arnold  from 
Constance,  as  was  Wezel  himself. 

'  See  above,  p.  20.  «  Hausrath,  p.  68. 

^Ep.  195.  *Otto  Frising.,  ibid.,^.  404. 

•Giesebrecht,  p.  136.  Epistolae  Wibaldi,  Jaffe,  B.  R.  G.,  vol.  viii,  p.  542.  See 
Gregorovins,  Geschichte  der  Stadi  Rom  im  Mittdalter,  vol.  iv,  p.  458. 


38        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

couched  in  much  the  same  terms  as  that  to  the  Bishop  of  Con- 
stance.' The  effect  of  this  letter  is  not  certainly  known.  For 
two  years  (1143-1145)  there  is  no  trace  of  Arnold.*  At  the 
close  of  that  period  he  and  Guido  appeared  simultaneously  in 
Italy.3 

At  this  time,  according  to  the  Historia  Pontificalis,  "Arnold 
promised  satisfaction  and  obedience  to  the  Roman  See,  and  was 
received  by  the  Lord  Eugenius  at  Viterbo.  Penance  was  en- 
joined upon  him,  which  he  agreed  to  fulfill :  fasting,  vigils  and 
prayers  about  the  sacred  places  in  Rome."  The  errors  for 
which  Arnold  made  satisfaction  are  not  stated ;  it  is  uncertain 
whether  they  were  the  heresies  of  Abelard  or  the  direct  assaults 
upon  the  Church  for  possessing  wealth  and  power  which  had 
caused  his  banishment  from  Brescia,*  and  which  he  had  appar- 
ently continued  to  make  in  other  lands.  He  owed  satisfaction 
'for  both.  When  he  was  condemned  for  his  teaching  at  Brescia 
in  1 139  he  had  promised  not  to  return  to  Italy;  5  and  the  ban 
of  Sens  still  hung  over  him. 

Arnold  may  have  forsworn  at  Viterbo  his  views  on  the  wealth 
and  secular  power  of  the  Church.  If  so,  the  state  of  things  he 
found  in  Rome  forced  him  once  more  to  resume  his  mission. 
In  Rome  as  in  Brescia,  a  great  many  of  the  citizens  were 
aroused  against  the  secular  power  of  the  Church.^  The  lower 
nobility  and  the  burghers  had  taken  advantage  of  the  prevail- 
ing disorder  during  the  schism  of  Anacletus,  to  reorganize  the 

'  "  Arnoldus  de  Brixia,  cujus  conversatio  mel,  et  doctrina  venenum;  cui  caput  col- 
umbae,  cauda  scorpionis  est;  quem  Brixia  evomuit,  Roma  exhorruit,  Francia  repulif, 
Germania  abominatur,  Italia  non  vult  recipere,"  etc.  St.  Bern.,  ep.  196.  Op.  cit., 
ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  188.  The  date  according  to  Giesebrecht  (p.  135)  is  not  before  1142 
nor  after  the  autumn  of  1 143. 

'Vacandard,  Arnauld de  Brescia,  p.  71.     Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  136. 

^Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  136.  See  also  Jaff6,  Regesta,  9296,  for  a  document  dated 
Sept.  12,  1 145,  which  shows  that  Guido  was  in  Italy. 

*St.  Bern.,  ep.  195.  "  Adhaeserat  Paetro  Abaelardo."  But  "  Videbelis  homi- 
nem  aperte  insurgere  in  clerum,"  etc.  Further,  he  was  cast  out  from  Italy  and  from 
Rome  "  pro  simile  causa." 

*St.  Bern.,  ep.  195. 

*For  the  whole  revolutionary  movement,  see  Gregorovius,  Geschichte  der  Stadt 
Rom  ini  Mittelaltcr,  bk.  viii,  cc.  4  seq.,  4th  edition,  vol.  iv,  pp.  428  seq. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  oq 

Senate  and  replace  the  Papal  Prefect  by  a  Patrician  of  their 
own  choosing.'  Lucius  II,  during  his  reign  of  one  year  (i  144- 
1145),  had  not  succeeded  in  wielding  the  temporal  power  in 
Rome.  He  had  aroused  the  higher  nobility  against  the  Senate ; 
but  the  burghers  had  none  the  less  prevailed.  They  had  sub- 
stituted Imperial  for  Papal  authority  by  offering  to  take  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  Emperor  Conrad  II,  and  by  demand- 
ing that  the  Pope  give  up  all  temporal  power  and  all  income 
save  tithes  and  free-will  offerings.' 

Eugenius  III  spent  eight  months  early  in  his  pontificate  with 
his  cardinals  at  Viterbo ;  3  months  during  which  the  new  gov- 
ernment in  Rome  showed  itself  powerless  to  prevent  rioting 
and  the  destruction  of  property  belonging  to  the  cardinals  and 
other  papalists.  At  the  end  of  the  year  1145  a  compromise 
between  Pope  and  revolutionists  enabled  Eugenius  to  enter 
Rome.4  Strife  soon  broke  out  again,  however,  and  in  January, 
1 146,  Eugenius  found  it  expedient  to  return  to  Viterbo.  In 
March  he  went  to  Sutri. 

Such  were  the  conditions  when  Arnold  went  to  Rome  in  the 
latter  weeks  of  1 145,  presumably  to  fulfil  the  penance  imposed 
upon  him  at  Viterbo  and  to  complete  his  reconciliation  with  the 
Roman  See.s  He  saw,  as  he  had  seen  at  Brescia,  the  clergy 
engaged  in  unseemly  strife  to  retain  temporal  power,  and  to 
continue  leading  the  luxurious  lives  which  Arnold  thought  so 
inconsistent  with  their  calling.  Walter  Map  believed  that  the 
sight  of  "  the  luxuriousness  of  the  cardinals  and  their  tables 
laden  with  gold  and  silver  dishes  "  first  led  Arnold  once  more 

^The  Revolution  was  a  fact  before  Arnold  went  to  Rome  (1144).  See  Otto  Pris- 
ing. Chron.,  bk.  vii,  cc.  27,  31,  34.  M.  G.  H.  SS  ,  vol.  xx,  pp.  264  seq.  Historia 
Pontificalis,  I.  c.  Two  letters  of  St.  Bernard,  no.  243  {op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  240-242), 
an  appeal  to  the  Romans  to  return  to  their  allegiance  to  the  Pope;  no.  244  {ibid,, 
pp.  242-243),  an  appeal  to  Conrad  to  defend  the  Pope.  Both  letters  were  written 
in  1145-1146  (Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  139),  and  neither  contains  any  reference  to 
Arnold. 

*Otto  Frising.     Chron.,  bk.  7,  c.  31,  /.  <r. 

*  Until  December,  1145.     Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  137. 

*Otto  Frising.     Chron.,  bk.  vii,  c.  34.     M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  266. 

^Historia  Poniificalis,  I.  c.     Giesebrecht,  ibid.,  p.  138. 


40        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

to  lift  up  his  voice  in  protest.  For  the  Prophet  of  Brescia 
could  not  keep  silence.  First  "  he  censured  the  clergy  tem- 
perately in  letters  to  the  Lord  Pope ;  but  they  took  it  in  bad 
part,  and  cast  him  forth.  He  then  returned  to  the  city  and  be- 
gan to  teach  indefatigably.  The  people  flocked  about  him  and 
heard  him  eagerly."  '  The  Pope  was  absent  in  France,  and 
there  was  no  power  to  prevent  Arnold's  preaching  openly.' 
"  He  was  heard  frequently  in  the  Capitol  and  in  public  dispu- 
tations." 

What  were  his  subjects?  "  He  was,"  says  Otto  of  Freising, 
"  a  slanderer  of  the  bishops  and  clergy,  a  persecutor  of  the 
monks,  and  a  flatterer  of  the  laity  as  well.  For  he  said  that 
clergy  who  hold  property,  bishops  who  enjoy  regalia,  and  monks 
who  have  possessions  cannot  in  any  wise  be  saved.  All  these 
things  pertain  to  the  secular  rulers,  and  should  by  their  benefi- 
cence be  given  to  the  laity  to  use."  3  Arnold  did  not  hold 
the  extreme  view  of  the  Apostolics,*  or  of  Waldo,  concerning 
apostolic  power.  He  would  allow  the  clergy  to  have  the  "  first- 
fruits  and  tithes,  and  whatever  the  devotion  of  the  people 
offered."  s  The  clergy  might  then,  according  to  Arnold,  have 
an  income  without  violating  the  commands  of  Christ  and  the 
customs  of  the  Apostolic  Age.  Property  they  must  not  hold. 
The  accounts  extant  of  Arnold's  teaching  can  hardly  mean  that 
he  sanctioned  even  communistic  possession,  ownership  of  any 

*  Walter  Map,  De  Nttgis  Curialium,  d.  i,  c.  24,  ed.  Wright,  p.  43. 

*  Historia  Pontificalis,  I.  c.  He  went  in  January,  1147,  to  bless  crusaders.  Vacan- 
dard,  Arnnuld de  Brescia.,  p.  81.     Hausrath,  ibid.,  p.  94. 

'Otto  Frising.  Gesta  Frid.,  bk.  ii,  c.  20.  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  404.  Cf. 
Gerohus  Reichersbergensis,  De  Aovitatibus  hujus  saeculi ;  in  Grisar,  Geroh  iiber  die 
Invesiiturs/rage,  Zeitschrift  fur  Katholischen  Theologie,  vol.  ix,  p.  549.  "  Memini 
me,  quum  fuissem  in  urbe  (Roma),  contra  quendam  Arnaldinum  valenter  literatum 
in  palatio  disputasse."  Breyer  {Die  Arnoldisten,  p.  397),  says  this  was  not  Arnold 
but  an  Arnoldist,  and  considers  it  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  sect  founded  by 
Arnold — a  conclusion  which  seems  hardly  warranted.     See  below,  pp.  50  seq. 

^See  above,  pp.  21  seq. 

^Gunther,  Ligurinus,  ed.  Reuber,  p.  322.  Believed  to  be  a  production  of  the  late 
twelfth  century,  the  material  being  taken  from  Otto  of  Freising.  See  Hausrath, 
Arnold,  p.  155,  n.  8.  Cf.  Platform  of  the  Romans  before  Arnold's  advent,  above, 
p.  38. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  4 1 

sort  of  capital  by  the  Church  as  an  institution.  Specific  charges 
were  made  against  the  clergy — simony,  worldliness  and  evil  liv- 
ing, lack  of  charity,  "  They  love  not  God  nor  their  neighbor,"  ' 
and  all  these  vices  were  attributed  to  their  wealth. 

He  then  attacked  the  governing  body  of  the  Church,  the 
Pope  and  Cardinals,  for  their  unapostolic  position.  The  Col- 
lege of  Cardinals,  he  claimed,  "  was,  by  reason  of  the  pride  and 
avarice  of  its  members,  their  hypocrisy  and  manifold  sins,  not 
the  Church  of  God,  but  the  house  of  buying  and  selling,  and 
the  den  of  thieves,  who  played  the  part  of  the  scribes  and  phari- 
sees  toward  the  Christian  people.  He  said  the  Pope  was  no 
Pope  because  he  was  not  an  apostolic  man  and  a  shepherd  of 
souls,  but  a  man  of  blood,^  who  maintained  his  authority  by 
killing  and  burning ;  a  tormentor  of  the  churches ;  an  oppressor 
of  the  innocent,  who  did  nothing  in  the  world  but  feed  on  flesh 
and  fill  his  coffers  and  empty  those  of  others.  He  said  he  was 
not  apostolic,  because  he  did  not  imitate  the  doctrine  nor  the 
life  of  the  Apostles,  and  therefore  no  reverence  nor  obedience 
was  due  him."  3  Further,  "Nothing  in  the  government  of  the 
city  pertains  to  the  supreme  Pontiff;  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
ought  to  be  enough  for  him."*  .^^ 

It  was  on  the  common  ground  of  this  last  doctrine  that 
Arnold  and  the  Roman  Revolutionists  formed  an  alliance. 
They,  in  their  rebellion  against  the  temporal  rule  of  the  Pope, 
were  seeking  to  restore  the  mechanism  of  the  Roman  govern- 
ment to  the  state  in  which  it  was  in  the  time  of  Constantine  and 
Justinian,  "who  held  in  their  hands  the  whole  earth  through  the 
might  of  the  Senate  and  the  people  of  Rome."5     The  Revolu- 

'  Gesta  di  Federico,  vv.  780-799.     Fonti  di  Storia  d'ltalia,  vol.  i,  p.  32. 

'  Cf.  Gerohus  of  Reichersberg,  who  regrets  that  Arnold  was  punished  by  death 
because  the  Church  was  thus  guilty  of  bloodshed.  In  De  Investigatione  Antichristi, 
bk.  i,  c.  42,  ed.  Scheibelberger,  p.  89. 

^ Historia  Pontificalis,  c.  31.  M.  G.  II.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  538.  C/.  Gesta  di  Freder- 
ico,  vv.  785-795.     Ibid.,  p.  31. 

*Otto  Frising.     Gesta  Frid.,  bk.  ii,  c.  20.     M,  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  404. 

*  C/.  Otto  Frising.,  bk.  ii,  c.  20.  SS.,  xx,  p.  404.  He  formulates  Arnold's  politi- 
cal doctrine  thus:  "  Proponens  antiquorum  Romanorum  exempla,  qui  ex  senatus 
maturitatis  consulto  et  ex  juvenilium  animorum  fortitudinis  ordine  et  integritate  totum 


42        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

tionists,  as  has  been  shown/  had  reorganized  the  Senate. 
Through  this  body  they  now  besought  the  Emperor  to  dwell 
in  Rome  and  rule  all  Italy ;  "  for  all  clerical  obstacles  are  now 
set  aside,"  ""  Arnold  was  not  primarily  a  republican,  he  was  not 
an  imperialist.  He  believed  that  the  Church  was  vitiated  by 
the  possession  of  wealth  and  temporal  power ;  and  he  was  con- 
vinced that  it  could  be  restored  to  apostolic  purity  only  by  los- 
ing that  wealth  and  power.  To  him,  then,  the  Roman  move- 
ment afforded  an  opportunity  to  purify  the  Church.  With  this 
object  in  view,  he  made  common  cause  with  the  Revolutionists. 
From  this  time  our  sources  for  the  life  of  Arnold  are  very 
meagre.  The  Historia  Pontificalis  ends;  Otto  of  Freising  be- 
comes unsatisfactory;  there  are  only  a  few  brief  notices  of 
Arnold  in  the  chronicles  of  the  progress  and  subsequent  decline 
of  the  Roman  Revolution.  Just  here,  however,  may  be  placed 
two  letters  which  are  believed  to  have  been  inspired,  if  not 
written  by  Arnold.  These  form  part  of  a  correspondence  be- 
tween the  Revolutionists  and  the  Emperor.  They  are :  first,  a 
letter  from  "  a  certain  friend  of  the  Senate  "  to  Conrad  III ;  3 
second,  one  from  Wezel  to  Frederick,*  Giesebrechts  believes 
that  "  quidam  fidelis  senatus  "  of  the  first  letter  may  well  be 
Arnold  himself;  for  he  had  bound  himself  to  the  Senate  by  an 
oath  of  allegiance.^  The  friend  of  the  Senate  is  at  all  events  a 
thorough  Arnoldist.  Wezel  is  evidently  an  adherent  of  Arnold. 
His  identity  is  unknown.  It  seems  probable  that  he  was  a  Ger- 
man.    Possibly  he  and  the  group  of  men  mentioned  in  his  ap- 

orbem  terrae  suum  fecerint.  Quare  reaedificandum  Capitolium,  renovandani  senator- 
iam  dignitatem,  reformandum  equestrem  ordinem  docuit."  Giesebrecht  {Arnold  von 
Brescia,  p.  19,  note)  does  not  credit  this  statement.  Vacandard  {Arnauld  de 
Brescia,  p.  73)  does. 

'^  Ibid.,  bk.  i,  c.  27,  p.  366.     Otto  Frising. 

*Otto  Frising.,  bk.  i,  c.  27,  ibid.,  p.  367. 

^ Epistolae  Wibaldi,  no.  216.     Jaffe,  B.  R.  G.,  vol.  i,  pp.  335  seq. 

^ Episiolae  Wibaldi,  no.  404.     Ibid.,  pp.  534  seq. 

*  Arnold,  p.  142,  note. 

*  Arnold  of  Brescia  "  qui  honori  urbis  et  rei  publice  Ronianorum  se  dicebatur  obli- 
gasse  prestito  juramento."  Historia  Pontificalis,  c.  31.  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx, 
p.  537- 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA 


43 


peal  to  the  Emperor,  men  who,  hke  him,  have  German  names, 
were  followers  won  by  Arnold  during  his  sojourn  in  Constance.' 
It  is  then  probable  that  in  these  documents  we  have  reasoning 
after  the  characteristic  Arnoldist  method. 

The  letter  of  the  man  who  describes  himself  as  "  qiiidam 
fidelis  senatus "  is  an  earnest  appeal  to  the  Emperor  to  come 
quickly  to  Rome  and  re-establish  imperial  control,  thus  limiting 
the  ecclesiastical  authority  to  its  proper  sphere.  For,  he  says, 
no  wars  should  be  waged  nor  murders  committed  in  the  world 
by  priests,  who  are  not  permitted  to  bear  the  sword  with  the 
chalice.  Their  duty  is  to  preach,  and  to  support  their  preach- 
ing by  good  works.^"  Wezel's  letter  was  written  after  Conrad 
was  dead,  when  Frederick  had  been  chosen  king,  but  before  his 
coronation  as  emperor.  He  reproaches  Frederick  because  he 
has  failed  to  recognize  the  Roman  people  as  the  source  of  his 
power,  but  like  his  predecessors  has  obeyed  the  summons  of  the 
"  Julianists,  heretics,  apostate  clergy  and  false  monks,  who  dis- 
regard their  vows  and  wield  authority  despite  the  evangelical, 
apostolic  and  canon  law,  and  in  defiance  of  all  other  laws,  both 
human  and  divine."  Wezel  then  quotes  St.  Peter  himself  3  to 
prove  that  the  Pope  is  "  apostate" :  that  he  is  no  true  descend- 
ant of  the  Fisherman.  Flee  that  which  is  of  this  world,  "  add 
to  your  faith  virtue,  and  to  your  virtue  knowledge."  How,  he 
says,  could  the  members  of  the  Curia  say  with  St.  Peter: 
"Behold  I  leave  all  and  follow  thee?"'^  And  again,  "  Silver 
and  gold  have  I  none?"^ 

Wezel  thus  convicted  the  worldly  See  of  Rome  out  of  the 
mouth  of  the  apostle  whom  the  mediaeval  world  honored  as  the 
founder  of  that  See  and  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  and  proved 
that  the  Papacy  was  unapostolic.  He  then  turns  to  the  founda- 
tion of  all : — the  commands  of  Christ,  uttered  when  he  sent  his 
apostles  out  into  the  world  and,  according  to  the  belief  of  eccle- 
siastics, organized  the  Church.  Referring  again  to  the  prelates 
Wezel  says:   "  How  can  such  men  hear  from  the  Lord's  lips 

>  Clave],  Arnauld  de  Brescia,  pp.  281-283.     Giesebrecht,  Arnold^  p.  143. 

»Jaffe,  B.  R.  G.,  vol.  i,  pp.  335-336- 

"  2  Pet.  I  :  4-7.  *  Matt.  19:  27.  *  Acts  3:6. 


44        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  AS  SI  SI 

'  You  are  the  salt  of  the  earth?' '  '  Ye  are  the  Hght  of  the  world?' 
To  Peter  and  the  vicars  (vicariis)  of  Peter  the  Lord  said :  As 
my  Father  hath  sent  me,  so  send  I  you.'  But  the  manner  of 
his  sending  by  the  Father  he  expressed,  saying:  '  If  I  do  not 
the  works  of  my  Father,  believe  me  not.'  3  If  Christ,  who  did 
no  sin,  w^as  not  to  be  believed  without  works,  how  are  those  to 
be  believed  who  do  evil — nay  more,  who  do  evil  publicly?" 
"  How,"  Wezel  proceeds,  "  can  the  clergy,  given  over  to  luxu- 
rious living,  bear  to  hear  the  foremost  of  the  commands  of  the 
Gospel :  '  Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit,'  ^  when  they  are  not 
poor  in  fact  or  in  aim?"  He  continues  his  argument,  following 
up  the  quotations  from  the  New  Testament  by  passages  from 
the  early  Fathers,  showing  how  far  the  Church  of  his  day  has 
lapsed  from  the  apostolic  ideal  of  a  ministry  given  to  self- 
denial,  humiHty,  poverty,  in  obedience  to  the  commands  of 
Christ.5  Wezel's  letter,  like  that  of  "  quidam  fidelis  senatus," 
reflects  Arnold's  characteristic  doctrine.  The  two  documents 
go  to  show  that  during  the  alliance  with  the  Roman  Revolu- 
tionists, Arnold  retained  and  championed  the  views  which  had 
led  to  his  banishment  from  Brescia  and  from  Italy  in  1 137. 

During  seven  turbulent  years  (1145-1152)^  Arnold  remained 
in  Rome.  At  the  end  of  that  time  the  Pope  made  peace  with 
the  popular  party.  One  of  his  demands  was  the  banishment  or 
surrender  of  Arnold.''  Given  these  alternatives,  Arnold  chose 
exile  rather  than  capitulation.  As  soon  as  he  had  left  Rome 
he  was  captured.  Shortly  after  his  capture  he  was  put  to  death.^ 
The  manner  of  his  death  is  uncertain.*     The  significance  of  it  is 

iMaU.  5:  13,  14.  'John  20:  21. 

'John  10:37.  *Matt.  5:3. 

^  Epistolae  Wibaldi,  no.  404.     Jaffe,  B.  R.  G.,  vol.  i,  pp.  539  seq. 

•Giesebrecht,  Arnold,  p.  141. 

^  Gregorovius,  ibid.,  498-499,  for  an  account  of  the  interdict  on  the  verge  of  Holy 
Week,  by  means  of  which  the  Pope  prevailed  over  Arnold's  party.  See  also  Giese- 
brecht,  ibid.,  pp.  145  seq.,  and  Clavel,  Arnauld,  pp.  273  seq.  Vita  Hadriani 
Papae  IV,  Watterich,  Pontificorwn  Romanorum  Vitae,  vol.  ii,  pp.  344  seq. 

'For  accounts  of  it,  see  Otto  Prising.,  bk.  ii,  c.  20,  who  says  he  was  burned,  and 
his  ashes  were  scattered  on  the  Tiber;  Gesta  di  Federico,  for  statement  that  he  was 
hanged;   a  statement  supported  by  Walter  Map,  w,  831  stq.,  I.  c. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  .r 

unquestionable.  The  party  which  stood  for  evangelical  poverty 
in  the  Church,  which  believed  that  the  clergy  should  confine 
themselves  to  the  duties  enjoined  upon  the  apostles  by  Christ, 
had  been  crushingly  defeated  by  the  power  of  the  Church  as  an 
institution. 

The  defeat  of  a  party,  however,  by  no  means  necessarily 
implies  the  conquest  of  the  principles  for  which  that  party  has 
contended.  Did  the  triumph  of  the  Papacy  and  the  death  of 
Arnold  mean  the  end  of  Arnold's  influence?  So  Giesebrecht 
would  have  us  believe.'  The  part  Arnold  played  in  the  Roman 
Revolution  has,  for  the  historian  of  the  Imperial  Age  in  Ger- 
many, obscured  the  fundamental  doctrine  which  led  him  to  cast 
in  his  lot  with  the  Revolutionists.  That  doctrine  formed  one  of 
the  great  world  currents  in  Arnold's  time,  and  was  destined  to 
grow  in  strength  during  the  two  succeeding  centuries,  and 
Arnold  had  preached  it  untiringly  with  all  the  force  of  vivid, 
magnetic  personality  and  overwhelming  conviction. 

The  extent  of  his  personal  influence  in  the  great  movement 
toward  Apostolic  Christianity  can  never,  owing  to  dearth  of  evi- 
dence, be  determined.  His  ideas  were  not  spread  by  any  writ- 
ings of  his  own,  so  far  as  we  know.  There  is  in  existence  no 
written  word  which  can  be  proved  to  be  his.''  There  is  not  even 
any  certainty  that  he  ever  wrote  books.  It  is  true  that  Innocent 
II  in  condemning  Arnold  with  Abelard  after  Sens  commanded 
"that  the  books  containing  their  errors  "  3  be  burned,  but  St. 
Bernard,  in  his  account  of  the  council,  speaks  only  of  Abelard's 
books.-*  Moreover,  Walter  Map  says:  "This  Arnold  was  con- 
demned by  Pope  Eugeniuss  undefended,  in  his  absence,  not  out 
of  his  writings,  but  because  of  his  preaching."^ 

'  Giesebrecht,  Arnold,  pp.  145  seq. 

'See  comment  on  the  letter  written  by  "  Quidatii Jidelis  senaius,"  above,  p.  42. 

'  Mansi,  vol.  xxi,  c.  565. 

*St.  Bernard,  ep.  189,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  182. 

*A  mistake,  unless  the  reference  is  to  the  final  condemnation  in  1155.  I^e  first 
condemnation  was  in  1137,  under  Innocent  II,  the  second  at  Sens,  in  1141,  under 
the  same  Pope.     Vacandard,  pp.  63,  67. 

^ De  Nugis,  D.  I.,  c.  24,  ed.  Wright,  p.  43. 


46        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  AS  SI  SI 

We  are  then  largely  dependent  for  information  about  Arnold 
upon  his  enemies — St.  Bernard,  Otto  of  Freising,  John  of 
Salisbury,  and  the  rest,  from  whom  we  have  already  quoted. 
All  these  accounts  show  that  Arnold  preached  evangelical  Chris- 
tianity/ They  prove  that  he  did  more — that  he  lived  the 
Apostolic  life  himself,  and  that  he  owed  to  his  life,  at  least  in 
part,  his  great  personal  influence.  St.  Bernard  wrote  to  the 
Bishop  of  Constance :  "  Would  that  his  doctrine  were  as  sound 
as  his  life  is  austere.  If  you  would  know,  the  man  comes 
neither  eating  nor  drinking;  like  the  Devil  alone,  he  hungers 
and  thirsts  for  the  blood  of  souls.  He  is  a  wolf  in  sheep's 
clothing."  "  St.  Bernard  cannot  deny  that  Arnold  has  the  bear- 
ing of  a  good  man.  "  His  conversation  is  honey,  his  teaching 
is  poison;  he  has  the  head  of  a  dove,  the  tail  of  a  scorpion."  3 
"  Arnold,"  says  another  witness,  ''  was  a  man  even  too  stern  and 
detached  in  manner  of  life."  ^  Otto  of  Freising  could  not  con- 
demn his  life.  The  worst  he  could  say  of  Arnold  is  summed 
up  in  the  following  statement:  "He  was  a  man  not  without 
natural  ability,  though  he  was  gifted  with  a  flow  of  words  rather 
than  with  solid  judgment.  He  was  fond  of  the  unusual,  eager 
for  novelty.  He  belonged  to  that  type  of  man  whose  mind  is 
easily  turned  to  devising  heresies  and  schismatic  disturbances."  s 
John  of  Salisbury  testifies,  "  he  had  the  priestly  dignity,  wore 
the  dress  of  a  regular  canon,  and  mortified  the  flesh  by  fasting 
and  sackcloth.  He  showed  himself  keen  of  intellect,  but  per- 
verse in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures.  He  was  an  elo- 
quent preacher,  and  inveighed  vehemently  against  the  delights 
of  this  world."  ^  His  doctrine  was  censured,  not  his  life.  Ac- 
cording to  Walter  Map,  "  he  was  noble  and  great  by  birth.  He 
excelled  in  letters,  and  was  first  in  religion.  He  allowed  him- 
self no  indulgence  in  food  or  clothing  beyond  what  sternest 

'See  above,  pp.  35,  40  seij. 

"Ep.  no.  195,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  187-188. 

'Ep.  no.  196,  ibid.,  p.  188. 

*  Gesta  di  Federico,  v.  762.     Ibid.,  p.  31. 

''Otto  Prising.     Gesta  Frid.,  bk.  i,  c.  20,  ibid.,  p.  403. 

^ Historia  Potttijicalis,  c.  31.     M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  537. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  47 

necessity  demanded.  He  went  about  preaching.  He  sought 
not  the  things  that  were  his  own,  but  the  things  that  are  of 
God.      He  did  ahvays  what  was  amiable  and  admirable."  ' 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Arnold's  apostolic  life  and  teach- 
ing aided  by  learning,  eloquence,  and  magnetism,  swayed  the 
people  among  whom  he  lived.  "  In  no  place  where  he  dwelt 
would  he  allow  the  people  to  be  at  peace  with  the  clergy.  He 
was  abbot  ^  at  Brescia,  and  while  the  bishop  was  on  a  journey 
to  Rome,  he  so  influenced  the  minds  of  the  citizens  that  they 
would  hardly  admit  the  bishop  when  he  returned."  3  It  is  not 
probable  that  the  Apostolic  doctrine  on  which  this  opposition 
was  based,  failed  to  find  adherents  also. 

In  Paris,  after  the  condemnation  of  Sens,  when  Arnold  was 
preaching  at  St.  Genevieve,  he  did  not  lack  hearers :  "  Poor 
men,  who  openly  begged  for  alms  from  door  to  door,  and  so 
supported  themselves  and  their  master."  ^ 

The  success  of  Arnold  in  winning  converts  is,  however,  best 
proved  by  St.  Bernard's  fear  of  his  influence,  expressed  in  the 
letters  already  cited  to  the  Bishop  of  Constance,  and  to  Guido, 
the  Papal  Legate.  Some  allowance  should  be  made  for  St. 
Bernard's  habitually  vigorous  language,  and  for  his  indignation 
because  the  French  bishops  had  failed  to  execute  the  Papal 
ban  which  he  himself  had  secured.  Still  the  subject  of  these 
letters  must  have  been  a  man  of  dangerous  power.  *'  Up  to 
this  time,"  wrote  Bernard,  "  wherever  Arnold  has  dwelt,  he  has 
left  behind  him  footprints  so  foul  and  terrible,  that  where  he 
once  has  set  his  foot,  he  never  dares  to  return  thither  any  more. 
Indeed  he  aroused  with  exceeding  violence  the  very  land  in 
which  he  was  born,  and  threw  it  into  confusion. ^  Therefore  he 
was  accused  before  the  Lord  Pope  as  a  very  evil  schismatic, 

'  De  Nugis,  ibid. 

^A  provost  of  Augustinian  Canons  was  called  abbot  in  Italy.     Giesebrecht,  ibid., 
p.  127. 

^ Historia  Pontijicalis,  c.  31.     M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  537. 
*L.c. 

*  For  commentary  on  Bernard's  injustice  in  ascribing  the  confusion  to  Arnold,  see 
above,  pp.  32  seq. 


48        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

and  expelled  from  his  native  country.  .  .  .  Then  for  a  like  cause, 
he  was  cast  out  of  the  French  kingdom  as  a  noted  schismatic. 
He  had  held  to  Peter  Abelard,  all  of  whose  errors,  attacked 
and  condemned  by  the  Church,  he  undertook  to  defend  with 
enthusiasm  and  energy,  with  him  and  for  him.  Through  all 
these  experiences  his  frenzy  has  not  been  diverted ;  but  his 
hand  is  still  stretched  out.  Like  a  raging  lion,  he  goes  about 
seeking  whom  he  may  devour.  He  is  a  fugitive  and  a  wanderer 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  he  ceases  not  to  do  among 

strangers  what  he  may  not  do  among  his  own  people If 

you  receive  him,  he  will  work  discord,  and  devour  your  peo- 
ple. .  .  .  He  knows  not  the  way  of  peace.  He  is  an  enemy  of 
the  Cross  of  Christ,  a  sower  of  discord,  a  disturber  of  the  peace, 
a  maker  of  schisms,  a  sunderer  of  unity.  His  teeth  are  arms 
and  arrows,  and  his  tongue  is  a  sharp  sword.  Wherefore  he  is 
used  to  draw  to  himself  by  sweet  words  and  the  appearance  of 
virtue  the  rich  and  powerful."  ' 

No  man  is  a  dangerous  disturber  of  the  established  order  of 
things  and  of  the  peace  founded  thereon  unless  he  can  command 
an  enthusiastic  following.  Arnold  was  a  peril  to  the  ecclesias- 
tical order  because  his  attacks  upon  its  inconsistencies  and 
abuses  aroused  the  people  to  desert  the  unapostolic  clergy  for 
the  apostolic  Prophet  of  Brescia.  Perhaps  the  Bishop  of  Con- 
stance found  out  by  experiences  of  his  own  the  power  of  Arnold. 
It  has  already  been  shown '  that  adherents  of  Arnold's  in  Rome 
may  well  have  been  followers  won  at  Zurich.  Hausrath  believes 
that  a  revolt  of  Augustinian  canons  at  ZUrich  against  the  bishop 
may  have  been  due  to  Arnold's  influence.^  The  revolt  took 
place,  however,  ten  years  after  Arnold's  departure,  and  there  is 
no  proof  that  it  was  an  echo  of  his  preaching. 

As  has  been  said,  no  one  knows  where  Arnold  was  during  the 
two  years  after  he  was  driven  from  Zurich.'*  Possibly  he  re- 
mained, protected  by  the  Legate  Guido,  in  Moravia  and  Bohe- 
mia— a  region  which  was  to  become  a  centre  for  heretical  evan- 
gelical Christians  later  on.s 

1  St.  Bernard,  ep.  no.  195,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  187  seq.  *  See  above,  p.  37. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  79-80,  *  See  above,  p.  38.  *  See  below. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA 


49 


In  Rome,  Arnold  at  once  became  a  power.  The  whole  his- 
tory of  the  revolutionary  movement  after  his  appearance  there 
testifies  to  his  influence.  One  incident  is  particularly  striking: 
"The  citizens  flocked  about  him,"  says  Walter  Map,  "  and  heard 
him  eagerly.  It  happened  they  heard  how  he  had  preached  a 
sermon  about  mammon  and  the  scorning  of  riches  in  the  very 
ears  of  the  Cardinals  and  the  presence  of  the  Pope.  Arnold 
was  cast  out  by  the  Cardinals.  The  people  thronged  to  the 
Curia  and  cried  out  against  the  Lord  Pope  and  the  Cardinals, 
saying  that  Arnold  was  a  good  man  and  just,  and  the  others 
were  avaricious,  unjust  and  evil ;  not  the  light  of  the  world,  but 
its  defilement." ' 

He  did  not  win  the  people  by  condoning  their  sins.  One 
writer,  it  is  true,  calls  him  "  flatterer  of  the  people,"  ^  but  the 
more  trustworthy  author  of  the  Gesta  di  Federico  gives  a  very 
different  account  of  him.  "  He  chid  with  equal  severity  priests 
and  lesser  folk,  thinking  that  he  alone  lived  rightly,  and  that 
others  were  in  error  with  the  exception  of  those  who  adhered 
to  his  dogmas.  He  also  carped  at  the  deeds  of  the  supreme 
Pontiff,  and  in  short  spared  no  one.  He  mingled  true  state- 
ments with  false,  and  thus  gave  pleasure  to  many.  He  also 
cursed  laymen  for  withholding  tithes,  receiving  usury,  taking 
what  was  not  their  own,  and  for  gaining  wealth  by  false  means."  3 
The  laity  followed  him  in  spite  of  plain-spoken  denunciation 
of  their  ill-doing,  and  even  the  clergy  whom  he  ceaselessly 
lashed  furnished  him  with  adherents  in  Rome  numerous  enough 
to  be  deplored  by  Pope  Eugenius.*  There  is  one  supreme 
proof  of  the  influence  which  made  him  the  dread  of  the  Pre- 
lates :  on  no  account  would  the  Pope  suffer  him  to  live  in  Rome 

1  De  Nu^is,  d.  i,  c.  24,  ed.  Wright,  p.  43. 

^  Gunther's  Ligurimis,  I.  c. 

^  Vv.  767-780. 

*  Epistola  Eugenii  III  Fapae,  Baronius,  Annales  Ecclesiastici,  Ann.  1 148,  no.  38, 
vol.  xii,  c.  371.  "  Fallax  et  invidus  humani  generis  inimicus  per  Arnaldum  schismati- 
cum,  quasi  per  membrum  proprium,hoc  effecit,  ut  quidam  capellani  unitatem  Ecclesiae, 
quae  sectionem  non  patitur,  quantum  in  eis  est,  dividentes,  ipsius  Arnaldi  sequantur 
errorem;  &  Cardmalibus  at  que  Archipresbyteris  suis  obedientiam  &  reverentiam  pro- 
mittere  &  exhibere  debitam  contradicant. 


50        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

after  the  downfall  of  the  Revolutionary  government.  Even  his 
dead  body  was  a  source  of  dread.  His  ashes  were  scattered  on 
the  Tiber,  lest  his  body  be  held  in  veneration  by  the  people.' 
The  Prelates  feared  Arnold  even  in  death. 

There  is  then  no  question  that  Arnold  had  everywhere  he 
went  a  following.  There  is,  however,  no  absolute  proof  that  he 
founded  a  sect.'  It  is  true  that  a  sect  called  "Arnoldists  "  was 
condemned  in  various  decrees,  and  mentioned  by  writers  on 
heresy  in  the  two  centuries  following  the  death  of  Arnold  of 
Brescia.  Few  details  are  given  concerning  this  sect,  its  origin 
or  its  dogmas.  No  one  can  be  sure  that  the  name  was  derived 
from  Arnold  of  Brescia.3  Even  if  this  be  true,  it  is  still  uncer- 
tain whether  the  sect  was  founded  by  him  and  held  the  beliefs 
which  he  had  preached.  What  are  the  authorities  on  these 
points?  The  only  contemporary  writer  who  states  clearly  that 
Arnold  founded  a  sect  is  the  author  of  the  Historia  Pontificalis, 
who  is  believed  to  have  been  John  of  Salisbury.*  This  authority 
says  that  Arnold  founded  a  sect  whose  members  won  popular 
favor  because  of  the  purity  and  austerity  of  their  lives.  "  It  is 
called  the  heresy  of  the  Lombards."  5  The  Ligurmus,  written 
no   latter  than  1186,  contains  a  veiled   reference  to  such  a  secL^ 

'  Otto  Frising.,  Gesta  Friderici,  bk.  2,  c.  20,  /.  c. 

'  Among  the  authorities  who  believe  that  Arnold  founded  the  sect  known  as 
Arnoldists  are:  Preger,  Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  der  Waldenser,^.  220;  Dieckhoff, 
Die  Waldenser  im  Mitielalter,  p.  163  (ed.  1851);  Keller,  Die  Reformation  und  die 
Alteren  Reformparteien,  p.  17  (ed.  1885);  Tocco,  L'Eresia  n el  Medio  Eva,  pp.  187, 
2c8  (ed.  1884);  Comba,  Histoire  des  Vaudois,  pp.  102  seq.  (ed.  1901);  Gregorovius, 
ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  475.  The  following  do  not  hold  that  the  Arnoldists  were  derived 
from  Arnold  of  Brescia :  C.  Schmidt,  in  Real  Encyclopedie ;  G.  Arnold,  Unpar- 
theiische Kircken  u.  Ketzerhistorie{\1\d),  pp.  378-395;  Guadagnini,  Vita  d'Arttaldo, 
in  Niccolini,  Arnaldo  da  Brescia,  p.  34  (1873).  For  Giesebrecht's  view,  see  above, 
p.  45.  Hahn,  Gesch.  der  Ketzer,  does  not  mention  the  sect.  Breyer,  Arjioldisten , 
pp.  389-390,  does  not  believe  that  Arnold  founded  it. 

'There  was  a  group  of  heretics  burned  at  Cologne,  of  whom  one  "Arnoldus 
Nomine"  was  called  by  the  rest  "magistrum  suum."  Caesar.  Heisterbach,  Dialogus 
Miraculorum,  c.  19,  ed.  Strange,  1851,  p.  298. 

*  See  above,  p.  34,  for  the  authorship  of  the  Historia  Pontificalis. 

*  Hist.  Pont.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  538. 

«  Unde  venenato  dudum  corrupta  sapore,  Et  nimium  falsi  doctrina  vatis  inhaerans 
servat  adhuc  uvae  gustum  gens  ilia  paternae,"  ii,  310  seq.,  I.  c. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  ci 

All  other  twelfth  century  accounts  are  silent  regarding  any- 
organized  following  of  Arnold's.  It  should,  however,  be  re- 
membered that  the  Historia  Pontificalis  is  an  especially  reliable 
source. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  the  Papal  and  Im- 
perial records  begin  to  furnish  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a 
sect  called  Arnoldists.'  In  1181'  Lucius  III  issued  a  bull  in 
which  he  condemed  "  catharos,  patarenos,  leonistas,  arnold- 
istas."3  The  condemnation  was  substantially  repeated  in  11844 
and  in  1229.S  Further,  Frederick  II  included  a  sect  of  Arnold- 
ists  among  the  heretics  doomed  to  extirpation  by  his  ferocious 
edicts.*  The  sect  is  only  named,  not  described  ;  and  it  must  be 
reiterated  that  according  to  the  one  reliable  account  which 
mentions  a  sect  founded  by  Arnold  of  Brescia,  that  sect  was  not' 
during  his  lifetime  called  by  his  name.  "  It  was  called  the 
heresy  of  the  Lombards."  While  these  decrees  are  incontro- 
vertible evidence  that  a  sect  existed  called  Arnoldists,  they  are 
not  proof  that  these  heretics  were  followers  of  Arnold  of  Brescia. 

There  is  a  little  further  evidence  of  the  continued  existence 
of  such  a  sect.  Several  thirteenth  century  writers  mention  it. 
Among  these  are :  David  of  Augsburg,^  Berthold  of  Regens- 
burg,  Stephen  of  Bourbon,  and  Durand  of  Mende.  Now  David 
of  Augsburg  was  a  Franciscan,  of  the  South  German  province, 
who  died  in  1272.  He  belongs  to  the  early  period  of  the 
organized    Franciscan    labors    against    heresy.^       Berthold    of 

'  Cf.  letters  of  Wezel  and  "  Quidam  fidelis  senatus  "  for  indications  that  followers 
of  Arnold  had  formulated  his  doctrine.     Above,  pp.  42  seq. 

'According  to  Dieckhoff,  Waldenser,  pp.  157,  168.  Breyer,  Arnoldisten,  p.  198, 
gives  the  date  as  1184. 

^  Mansi,  vol.  xxii,  c.  476.  *  Ibid.,  p.  477. 

*  M.  G.  H.  Ep.,  saec.  13;  vol.  i,  p.  318. 

*  Nov.  22,  1220.  M.  G.  H.  LL.,  vol.  ii,  p.  244.  Feb.  22,  1232,  j^io''.,  p.  285.  May 
14,  1238,  ibid.,  p.  326.     June  26,  1238,  ibid.,  p.  328.     Feb.  22,  1239,  ibid.,  p.  485. 

'  Under  the  name  "  Arnostute,"  in  Tractat  de  inqiiisiciotte  hereticorum,  given  by 
Preger,  in:  Kgl.  Bay.  Akad.  der  Wissensch.  Hist.  CI.,  vol.  xiv,  pt.  2,  p.  216.  Also 
in  Martene,  Thesaurus,  vol.  v,  pp.  1778  seq.,  where  it  is  attributed  to  Yvonetus. 
Breyer  {Arnoldisten,  p.  412)  says  that  all  the  sects  mentioned  by  David  are 
Waldensian. 

*  Breyer,  ibid.,  p.  187. 


52        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

Regensburg  was  his  pupil,  and  was  also  a  Franciscan.  He  was 
a  popular  preacher,  and  travelled  in  Austria,  Bohemia  and 
Silesia,  between  1250  and  1260.'  He,  like  his  master,  simply 
names  the  "  Arnoldisti."  If  Arnold  of  Brescia  founded  a  sect, 
there  should  have  been  traces  of  it,  certainly  in  Switzerland, 
possibly  in  Austria  and  Bavaria.  We  might  then  expect  to  find 
a  more  distinctive  account  of  these  heretics  than  the  mere  refer- 
ence in  one  of  Berthold's  sermons, ^^  a  reference  which  might 
well  imply  only  an  acquaintance  with  the  stereotyped  lists  of 
heretics  given  in  the  condemnatory  edicts.  Papal  and  Imperial. 
Stephen  of  Bourbon  was  a  Dominican  monk  of  Lyons,  and  an 
Inquisitor;  a  genial  person,  somewhat  garrulous,  who  often 
gained  information  by  talking  with  people  of  various  sorts, 
somewhat  as  Herodotus  did.3  He  writes  in  a  diverting  fashion 
of  the  multifarious  heresies  existing  in  Lombardy,  and  gives  as 
his  authority  a  man  who  had  studied  for  eighteen  years  among 
the  Waldensians.*  He  mentions  a  bewildering  variety  of  here- 
tics. In  a  list  of  sects  named  after  their  founders  he  includes 
the  Arnoldists.5  He  says  nothing  about  their  tenets.  He  has 
just  been  speaking  of  "  those  who  are  called  Communiati, 
because  they  say  all  things  ought  to  be  in  common,"  in  contra- 
distinction to  "  Pauperes  de  Lumbardia,"  who  receive  posses- 
sions.^ It  is  impossible  to  determine  who  these  are.  Stephen 
evidently  believes  them  to  be  outside  the  sects,  among  which  he 
has  included  the  Arnoldists.  Yet  the  reader  is  at  once  reminded 
that,  according  to  John  of  Salisbury,  the  sect  founded  by  Arnold 
was  called  the  heresy  of  the  Lombards.^  The  doctrine  regard- 
ing property,  suggested  rather  than  stated  by  Stephen,  might 

1  Introduction  to  Pfeiffer-Strohl  Edition  of  Berthold  von  Regensburg  (1862-1880). 

*  Speaking  of  heretics,  he  says:  "  Ein  heizent  Toverlewe  und  ein  Atiani  und 
Runkeler  unJe  Sifrider  unde  Sporer  und  Manachei  und  Arnolder."  Sermon, 
"  Sae/u  sint  die  reines  herzens  sinlJ'     Ed.  Pfeiffer-Strohl,  vol.  i,  p.  402. 

*  Stephen  of  Bourbon,  Tractatus  de  diversis  Materiis  Praedicabilibits,  ed.  Lecoy 
de  la  Marche,  pp.  iv-vii. 

*  Tractatus,  etc.,  pt.  iv,  tit.  7,  par.  330 ;  ibid.,  p.  280. 

*The  list  reads:  "Arnaldiste,  Speroniste,  Leoniste,  Cathari,  Patareni,  Manachei 
sive  Burgari;  ibid.,  p.  281. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  2S0,  281.  ^  See  above,  p.  50. 


ARNOLD  OF  BRESCIA  53 

conceivably  have  been  derived  from  Arnold  of  Brescia.  It 
might,  on  the  other  hand,  have  come  from  the  Humiliati,  who 
certainly  existed  in  Arnold's  day,  and  who,  as  we  shall  see, 
were  widely  distributed  through  Lombardy  in  the  thirteenth 
century/ 

The  last  reference  to  the  Arnoldists  in  thirteenth-century 
literature  is  in  Durand  of  Mende's  famous  little  "  Rationale 
divinorum  officiorum,"  finished  in  1286,  published  first  in  May- 
ence  in  1459,  and  very  many  times  afterward.^  Durand  says 
the  Church  is  "  called  a  city  because  of  the  communion  of  her 
citizens;  she  is  defended  by  the  fortifications  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  by  which  heretics  are  repelled."  3  Among  these 
heretics,  whom  he  specifies,  are  the  "Arnoldistae,  blasphemous 
heretics  who  say  that  in  no  place  is  it  stated  that  Christ  handed 
over  the  guardianship  of  his  spouse,  the  Church,  to  sensual  and 
unchaste  servants,  or  gave  to  such  the  power  to  perform  the 
sacred  mysteries  or  to  bind  and  loose,  or  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  Because  only  those,  as  says  Gregory,  even  the 
just  men  who  are  still  alive,  have  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing  possessed  by  the  apostles,  if  they,  together  with  the 
doctrine,  hold  also  to  the  life  and  faith  of  the  apostles."  ^  This 
rings  Hke  the  creed  of  Arnold  of  Brescia.  No  ministry  can  be 
a  true  one  except  through  imitating  the  ministry  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Age.  In  another  place  Durand  says  that  the  Arnoldists 
assert  that  men  do  not  receive  the  Holy  Spirit  through  baptism, 
but  by  the  laying  on  of  hands.s  Do  these  two  passages  refer  to 
the  same  sect?  Upon  this  question  no  light  is  thrown  by  the 
context.  Again,  is  this  last  doctrine  likely  to  have  been  derived 
from  Arnold  of  Brescia?  He,  to  be  sure,  held  peculiar  views 
regarding  baptism.^     The  doctrine  attributed  by  Durand  to  his 

'  See  below,  p.  59  seq. 

■^  Note  the  long  list  of  editions  in  the  British  Museum  Catalogue. 

"  Durandus  of  Mende,  Rationale  divinorum  officiorum,  lib.  i,  par.  i;  "Dt  Ecde- 
sia"  ed.  Fust  &  Schoffer,  Mainz,  1459,  fol.  1. 

'  Lib.  4,  ibid.,  fol.  36.  ^  Lib.  i,  ibid.,  fol.  16. 

*  Otto  Frising.,  bk.  2,  c.  20;  ibid.,  p.  404.  Praeter  haec  de  sacramento  altaris,  bap- 
lismo  parvulorum  non.  sane  dicitur  sensisse.  Further,  he  believed  the  sacraments 
were  not  valid  in  the  hands  of  sinful  priests.  Gesia  di  Federico,  ii,  784-785.  Cf. 
Hreyer,  Arnoldistcn,  pp.  389  390. 


54        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

Arnoldists   is,   however,   Catharan,'   and   no   proof    exists   that 
Arnold  of  Brescia  was  influenced  by  Catharism. 

These  thirteenth-century  writers  then  prove  that  a  sect  called 
Arnoldists  maintained  for  a  time  an  individual  existence  among 
the  numerous  heretical  bodies  of  that  time.  They  do  not  prove 
that  this  sect  had  any  connection  with  Arnold  of  Brescia.  It  is 
then  not  certain  that  Arnold  founded  a  sect.  The  question 
whether  he  did  or  did  not  leave  behind  him  an  organized  fol- 
lowing is,  of  course,  interesting  and  significant.  The  fact  that 
this  question  cannot  be  answered  does  not,  however,  make  any 
real  difference  in  the  estimate  of  Arnold's  influence.  There  is 
no  doubt  that  he  won  everywhere  a  following  large  enough  to 
be  a  danger  to  the  established  order.  His  restless  wanderings 
led  him  along  paths  which  were  to  be  trodden  by  many  be- 
lievers in  primitive  Christianity,  in  apostolic  poverty.  His  own 
Lombardy  was  the  home  of  the  Humiliati,  of  a  powerful  branch 
of  the  Waldenses,  of  the  nameless  sects  described  by  Stephen 
of  Bourbon.  France  gave  birth  to  Waldo,  and  harbored  many 
communities  of  his  followers.  In  Germany  the  Poor  Men  of 
Lyons  especially  flourished.  The  zeal  of  some  of  these  en- 
thusiasts may  easily  have  been  kindled  by  Arnold's  fiery  words, 
or  by  their  echoes.  They  may  have  been  inspired  by  the 
apostolic  life  of  the  Prophet  of  Brescia  to  model  their  lives  after 
the  commands  of  Christ.*  >- 

'  Schmidt,  Histoire  des  Caihares,  p.  150;  Lea,  Inquisition,  vol.  i,  pp.  93-94. 

'  Breyer  {Arnoldisten,  pp.  403  seq.)  is  convinced  that  the  Arnoldists  existed  in 
Lombardy  as  a  separate  sect  when  the  Waldenses  first  appeared  there;  that  the 
Waldenses  were  influenced  by  the  Arnoldists,  who,  however,  from  this  time  ceased 
to  exist  as  a  distinct  sect.  He  bases  his  view  on  the  teaching  of  the  Lombard 
Waldenses  that  the  Sacraments  are  worthless  in  sinful  hands,  on  the  fact  that  Arnold- 
ists and  Waldenses  apply  to  the  Church  the  same  unpleasant  epithets.  This  last 
argument  has  little  force  because  the  epithets  in  question  were  habitually  applied  to- 
the  Church  by  people  who  were  dissatisfied  with  it. 


CHAPTER  IV 
The  Humiliati 

Less  than  twenty-five  years  after  the  death  of  Arnold,  and 
nearly  thirty  years  before  Francis  of  Assisi  first  went  to  Rome, 
there  were  heard  at  the  Vatican  the  voices  of  other  men  who 
wished  to  restore  evangelical  Christianity.  Their  principle 
was  essentially  that  of  Arnold,  though  their  demands  differed 
from  his.  Arnold's  voice  had  made  the  streets  of  Rome  re- 
sound with  denunciations  of  the  Pope  and  the  members  of  the 
Curia  for  their  wealth,  their  sins,  their  possession  of  temporal 
power — all  forbidden  by  Christ  to  His  Apostles.  The  new 
apostolic  Christians  came  humbly  seeking  the  Pope's  sanction 
for  their  attempt  to  conform  their  own  lives  to  the  model  of 
the  primitive  Church.  Peter  Waldo  was  among  them.  Their 
request  that  they  be  allowed  to  serve  God  and  the  Church  was 
refused,  and  they  were  driven  into  the  ranks  of  the  heretics/ 
Francis  was  to  make  the  same  request,  and  to  become  the 
staunch  supporter  of  the  Church,  when,  hard  pressed  by  heresy, 
she  needed  all  the  champions  who  would  enlist  under  her 
banner. 

Meantime,  five  years  before  the  "  First  Rule  "  was  given  to 
Francis  and  his  followers,  a  group  of  enthusiasts  had  gained 
audience  of  Innocent  III  on  a  similar  errand.  Like  Waldo  and 
Francis  they  wished  the  Pope  to  authorize  them  to  lead  a  life 
of  humility,  self-denial,  and  hard  work.  They  wanted  to  be- 
come an  organized  community  with  an  established  rule,  sanc- 
tioned by  the  Curia.^     Unlike  Waldo,  they  came  at  the  sum- 

^  See  below,  pp.  59  seq. 

'  Privilegium  qualiter  ordo  Humiliatorum  licite  potest  habere  proprium  in  com- 
muni,  et  de  confirmatione  regule,  et  de  juramento  non  prestando  directo  prelatis 
ordinis  cum  certis  gratiis.  June  12,  1201.  Tiraboschi,  Vetera  Humiliatorum  MonU' 
menta,  ed.  1766,  vol.  ii,  p.  135, 

55 


^6       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

mons  of  the  Pope  himself.  Between  1179  and  1201,  apostolic 
Christianity  had  become  a  recognized  force.  Innocent  III  re- 
alized that  the  Church,  beset  by  enemies  who  fought  for  con- 
science' sake,  needed  to  organize  all  the  enthusiasm  and  religious 
zeal  she  could  command  within  her  own  ranks.  He  authorized 
the  existence  of  this  new  band  of  religionists,  and  issued  rules 
for  the  three  sections  into  which  they  were  divided. 

Thus  were  formally  founded  the  three  orders  of  the  Humiliati. 
The  orders  thus  sanctioned  shared  the  fate  of  most  of  such  or- 
ganizations founded  by  enthusiasts  within  the  Church.  For  a 
time  they  remained  true  to  the  ideal  of  the  founders.  Then, 
because  of  their  sanctity,  all  people  "  thought  themselves  blessed 
if  the  brethren  would  receive  alms  from  them.  So  it  came  to 
pass  that  they  were  enriched  beyond  measure,  and  the  owners 
of  great  possessions." '  The  present  essay  is  not  concerned, 
however,  with  the  downfall  of  the  authorized  Humiliati,  but  with 
the  wider  movement  of  which  they  were  but  one  manifestation ; 
and  to  this  end  their  origin  rather  than  their  destiny  needs  in- 
vestigation. 

There  is  no  reliable  evidence  bearing  on  the  early  history  of 
the  Humiliati.  They  did  not  write  their  history  until  the  fif- 
teenth century;^  and  their  chroniclers  then  give  no  references 
to  authorities  or  sources,  beyond  statements  that  they  have  seen 
certain  documents  of  early  date,  which,  however,  they  omit  to 
transcribe,  and  of  which  no  trace  has  since  been  found.  3  If 
their  traditions  are  to  be  believed,  the  first  Humiliati  gave  them- 
selves up  to  the  evangelical  life  of  preaching  and  poverty  a  hun- 
dred years  before  Arnold  of  Brescia  dwelt  with  Abelard  at  the 
Paraclete. 

*  Jacobi  de  Vitriaco,  Ziirt  Duo,  Quorum  prior  Orientalis  sive  Hierosolymitana  ; 
alter,  Ocrdentalis  Hislorice  Nomine  Inscribitur  (ed.  Duaci,  1596),  c.  20,  p.  317. 
The  passage  refers  to  the  "fray  monks,"  but  it  is  an  excellent  statement  of  the  pro- 
cess by  which  the  very  virtues  of  orthodox  religionists  brought  about  their  corruption. 

*  For  account  of  sources,  see  Tiraboschi,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  Introduction. 

*The  earliest  known  document  relating  to  the  history  of  this  order  is  a  gift  of  land 
by  Guido  de  porta  Orientalis  of  land  in  the  diocese  of  Milan.  "Guidonis  de  Porta 
Orientali  pro  Vicoboldonensibus  Humiliatis"  (1176),  Tiraboschi,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p. 
117.     In  1 186  Urban  III  assured  them  the  right  to  hold  property.     Ibid.,  p.  123. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  AT  I  57 

"  The  origin  and  beginning  of  the  order  of  the  HumiHati," 
runs  the  legend,  "  was  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Henry  II,' 
who  came  into  Lombardy  and  held  under  suspicion  many  Lom- 
bard nobles,  especially  of  Milan  and  Como.  To  prevent  their 
plotting  against  the  Empire,  he  sent  them  into  exile  in  Germany 
in  the  year  1017.  After  a  time  these  same  nobles  were  in- 
spired by  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  promised  to  serve 
God  with  humility,  and  to  put  aside  all  worldly  pomp ;  for  they 
thought  they  could  not  go  to  Heaven  without  humility.  Then 
these  exiles  made  no  delay.  They  put  off  the  old  man,  they 
laid  aside  their  costly  garments  and  put  on  clothing  of  sack- 
cloth. When  they  came  to  speak  together,  they  decided  that 
if  by  God's  help  they  should  return  to  their  native  land,  they 
would  persevere  in  the  religious  life  as  they  conceived  it. 
When  these  facts  came  to  the  Emperor's  ears,  he  summoned 
them  to  appear  before  him  in  the  dress  they  had  assumed ;  and 
wondering  he  said  :  '  Draw  near,  best  beloved  HumiHati.  Have 
you  given  yourselves  to  religion  as  your  habit  bears  witness?' 
To  whom  they  answered :  '  Even  as  thou  seest,  O  Emperor.' 
And  then  he  suffered  them  to  return  to  their  fatherland.  And 
they  who  had  been  exiles  brought  their  own  families  in  their 
homes  to  this  same  devotion,  and  lived  with  their  wives.  Be- 
cause they  would  not  be  idle  they  were  merchants  and  estab- 
lished workshops  for  wool,  as  I  know  from  their  successors. 
They  multiplied  like  fish,  in  Lombardy  and  outside  it."'' 

These  companies  of  devout  men  and  women  persisted,  the 
legend  runs,  for  more  than  a  century  without  any  recognized 
rule;  "and  they  were  called  brethren  of  the  third  order."  3 
Later,  certain  of  the  brethren  separated  from  their  wives,  and 
communities  of  monks  and  nuns  were  established.  Thus  was 
founded  the  second  order.     To  this  order  St.  Bernard  gave  a 

•  Henry  II  was  in  Italy  in  1004  and  1014.  Bryce,  Holy  Roman  Empire,  p.  143 
(ed.  1889). 

^  Chronicon  Ordinis  Humiliatorum  Compilata  de  anno,  1419,00.  i  and  2.     Tira- 
boschi,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii,  p.  230.     For  account  of  this  chronicle  see  Tiraboschi,  op.  cit., 
pp.  51  seq. 
Ibid.,  c.  3. 


^8       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

rule  in  1134.  We  are  still,  of  course,  in  the  domain  of  legend. 
After  a  time,  we  are  told,  a  certain  John  de  Oldrado,  surnamed 
de  Meda  from  his  birthplace,  a  town  of  that  name  near  Milan, 
established  the  first,  or  clerical  order.^ 

The  legend  stands  unsupported  by  any  contemporary  evi- 
dence. There  is  no  trace  of  St.  Bernard's  connection  with  the 
order  in  his  letters  or  any  other  of  his  voluminous  writings. 
The  canonization  of  John  de  Meda  rests  on  tradition;  though 
it  was  confidently  and  persistently  asserted  in  writings  of  the 
brethren  of  a  later  day,  and  taken  for  granted  in  a  Breviary  of 
the  order  approved  by  Paul  III  in  1548.='  The  earliest  known 
facts  are  that  in  1 1 76  a  grant  of  land  was  made  to  the  Humiliati 
near  Milan,  and  that  their  right  to  hold  land  was  assured  in 
1 186  by  Pope  Urban  III. 3  In  1201  Innocent  III  granted  Rules 
to  the  three  orders  of  the  Humiliati.'^ 

Though  1 20 1  saw  the  first  formal  recognition  of  the  Humil- 
iati as  an  order,  the  real  beginning  of  the  movement  must  have 
been  a  good  deal  earlier.  Formal  recognition  of  every  move- 
ment is  always  preceded  by  a  period  of  obscure  development; 
and  men  and  women  in  Milan  had  doubtless  been  giving  them- 
selves to  a  life  of  poverty  and  humility  for  some  years  before 
their  representatives  won  Innocent's  sanction.  ^ 

There  is,  however,  one  bit  of  evidence  as  to  their  early  his- 
tory which  the  orthodox  order  of  the  Humiliati  would  not  have 
cited,  and  which  indicates  that  the  movement  of  which  the 
authorized  Humiliati  were  but  one  manifestation  was  already  a 
strong  one  at  least  twenty-two  years  before  Innocent's  Rule  was 

1  Chronicon  Ordinis  Hu7niliatortmt,  cc.  9  and  10.  Ibid.,  pp.  235-236.  A  deed 
of  gift  from  John  de  Meda,  dated  1056,  executed  apparently  by  his  wife,  is  one  of 
the  documents  which  the  compiler  of  the  Chronicon  saw,  but  did  not  think  it  neces- 
sary to  transcribe.  L.  c.  Cf.Joannis  de  Meda.  Presbyieris,  Vita  Auctore  anonymo, 
AA.  SS.  Boll.,  vii,  Sept. ,  pp.  343  seq.     The  Life  has  little  value.     See  Praef. 

^  L.c. 

*  See  above,  p.  56. 

*Tiraboschi,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  128  seq.     See  below,  pp.  62  seq. 

*  A  condemnation  of  heretics  by  the  Council  of  Verona  in  11 84  shows  that  already 
at  that  time  the  Church  recognized  the  existence  of  true  Humiliati  as  distinguished 
from  false.     See  below,  pp.  60  seq. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  ATI 


59 


issued.  "  There  were,"  says  the  author  of  the  chronicle  of 
Laon,  "certain  citizens  at  this  time  (1178)  in  the  cities  of 
Lombardy  who  lived  at  home  with  their  families  in  poverty, 
following  a  certain  kind  of  religious  living.  They  abstained 
from  lies,  oaths,  and  law  suits ;  they  were  content  with  simple 
clothing.  They  posed  as  upholders  of  the  Catholic  faith.  They 
went  to  the  Pope,  and  asked  him  to  sanction  their  tenets.  The 
Pope  granted  that  they  might  carry  out  their  theories  provided 
they  did  this  in  humility  and  honesty ;  but  he  expressly  forbade 
them  to  hold  conventicles,  and  strictly  prohibited  their  presum- 
ing to  preach  in  public.  They,  however,  defied  the  apostolic 
command,  were  disobedient,  and  allowed  themselves  to  incur 
excommunication.  They  called  themselves  Humiliati,  because 
they  were  not  clad  in  dyed  garments,  but  were  satisfied  with 
those  of  natural  colour."' 

In  the  light  of  this  brief  account  Innocent's  Rule  becomes 
intelligible,  and  shows,  as  will  appear,  that  the  great  statesman 
reversed  the  policy  of  his  predecessor  toward  the  apostolic 
reformers,  and  conciliated  so  far  as  he  could  enthusiasts  who 
might  otherwise  become  enemies  of  the  Church.^  It  is  prob- 
able that  these  Humiliati  were  received  by  the  Pope  at  the  very 
Council  to  which  Waldo  had  gone  to  win  the  Church's  sanction 
for  his  attempt  to  lead  the  apostolic  life,  and  from  which  he, 
like  them,  went  forth  to  strengthen  not  the  Church,  but  heresy. s 

The  Humiliati  whom  Alexander  III  censured  were  almost 
certainly  the  same  in  origin  with  the  men  to  whom  Innocent  III 
gave  the  Sanction  of  the  Church  twenty-two  years  later.  The 
heretical  Humiliati  abstained  from  oaths ;  the  orthodox  Humili- 
ati were,  according  to  Innocent's  Rule,  to  take  oaths  only  in 
case   of   necessity.     The  disobedient   Humiliati   lived   at  home 

1  Chronicon  Lauduriense,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  449. 

'  Cf.  Innocent's  policy  toward  the  Poor  Catholics,  see  below,  and  toward 
Francis  and  Dominic. 

*  Breyer,  Arnoldisten,  p.  404.  But  the  Chronicon  Laudunense  gives  11 78  as  the 
date  of  Waldo's  mission  to  Rome,  and  11 79  for  the  Humiliati.  Walter  Map,  in  his 
account  of  the  appearance  of  the  Waldenses  at  the  3d  Lateran  Council,  does  not 
mention  the  Humiliati;  but  he  might  have  failed  to  distinguish  among  the  humbly 
clad  men  who  came  thither  on  much  the  same  errand.     See  below. 


6o       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

with  their  families ;  the  third  order  approved  by  Innocent  were 
to  remain  with  their  families,  and  were  forbidden  to  put  away 
their  wives  except  for  adultery.  Both  groups  wore  simple 
clothing.  Both  believed  themselves  to  be  champions  of  the 
Church.  Both  true  and  false  Humiliati  wished  to  preach.  Per- 
mission was  refused  to  those  who  first  sought  papal  sanction. 
It  may  well  be  that  Innocent's  carefully  guarded  license  in  the 
Rule  of  1 20 1  was  the  result  of  the  disregard  of  the  first  set  of 
humble  brethren  for  the  unqualified  prohibition  of  his  prede- 
cessor. It  had  been  proved  that  denial  of  the  right  to  preach 
turned  into  heretics  men  who  were  disposed  in  all  things  else  to 
serve  the  Church  faithfully,  and  Innocent  enlisted  champions 
wherever  he  could. 

There  is  further  evidence  that  both  branches  of  the  Humili- 
ati sprang  from  the  same  trunk.  The  Council  of  Verona  issued 
in  1181  '  a  decree  against  various  heretics.  Among  them  were 
named  "  those  who  falsely  pretend  to  be  Humiliati,  or  Poor 
Men  of  Lyons."  ^  The  execution  of  this  decree  was  evidently 
found  to  be  difficult,  so  far  as  the  Humiliati  were  concerned ; 
for,  in  1 197,  Innocent  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  Verona:  "We 
understand  that  on  the  authority  of  our  letter  3  sent  to  our  be- 
loved sons  the  clergy  of  your  Church  against  the  Zazari,  the 
Poor  Men  of  Lyons,  and  the  Hum.iliati  who  have  not  yet  fol- 
lowed the  papal  command,  one  of  the  aforesaid  clergy  has 
issued  sentence  of  excommunication  against  the  Humiliati  and 
all  heretics,  without  the  distinction  we  established  in  our  letters. 
Acting  on  the  precedent  of  this  sentence,  some  have  shunned 
certain  men  who  are  called  by  the  people  Humiliati,  perhaps 
against  their  will,  and  who  savour  not  of  heresy,  but  of  ortho- 
dox  faith,  and   who    in   all    humility   of    heart   and   body   are 

^  Bull  ^^  Ad  abolendam"  Mansi,  vol.  xxii,  c.  476.  D'Argentre,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  71, 
gives  1 183  as  the  date.     Cf.  Mansi,  ibid.,  c.  477,  for  repetition  of  the  edict  in  1 184. 

*  "  In  primis  ergo  Catharos,  et  Patarinos,  et  eos  qui  se  Humiliatos,  vel  Pauperes  de 
Lugduno,  falso  nomine  mentiuntur.  Josepinos,  Passaginos,  Arnoldistas,  perpeluo 
decernimus  anathemati  subjacere." 

*No  such  letter  appears  in  the  "  Regesia"  of  Innocent  III,  nor  is  any  such  cited 
by  Tiraboschi  or  by  Spondanus.  What  his  qualifications  were,  it  is  therefore  im- 
sible  to  determine. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  ATI  6 1 

anxious  to  be  servants  of  God,  and  who  may  even  have  sworn 
to  you  that  they  remain  faithful  to  the  rule  of  the  Church  .  .  . 
Since  it  is  truly  not  our  intention  to  condemn  the  innocent  with 
the  guilty,  we  command  that  you  call  such  men  to  your  pres- 
ence and  inquire  of  them  and  of  others  about  their  life  and 
conversation  and  anything  else  which  you  think  should  be  in- 
vestigated." ' 

Two  years  later  Innocent  made  overtures  and  gave  a  Rule  to 
men  who  styled  themselves  Humiliati.  May  it  not  be  true  that 
in  the  letter  just  quoted  he  distinguished  between  these  men, 
who  did  not  wish  to  be  numbered  among  the  heretical  Humi- 
liati, and  those  obdurate  people  who  had  persisted,  in  the  face 
of  the  papal  prohibition,  in  obeying  Christ's  command  as  they 
interpreted  it,  and  preached  the  gospel?  The  obedience  of  the 
Humiliati  whom  he  conciliated  ^  had  been  questioned  on  pre- 
cisely the  points  which  constituted  the  contumacy  of  the  "  false 
Humiliati."  The  whole  body  had  not  disobeyed  to  an  equal 
degree  ;  but  the  tendencies  which  had  made  heretics  of  some  of 
its  members  were  at  work  in  the  rest.  Innocent  had  then 
written  to  the  Humiliati  to  suggest  that  they,  in  order  to  put  an 
end  to  certain  scandals  which  had  been  circulated  regarding 
them,  draw  up  for  his  approval  a  Rule.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  this  command  that  the  representatives  of  the  order  went  to 
Romic  in  1201 ,  and  the  Rule  approved  by  the  Pope  was  a  modi- 
fied  version  of  that  which    they   themselves   prepared.3     The 

'  /?/.  Innocentii  III  Veroneitsi  Episccpo.,  Lib.  ii,  no.  228,  Migne,  vol.  214,  cc. 
788-789. 

'  See  study  of  the  Rules,  below. 

^  Ad  scaQdalum  extinguendum,  quod  contra  vos  fuerat  obortum,  vobis  dedimus  in 
mandatis  .  .  .  ut  proposita  vestra  conformaretis  in  unum  propositum  regulare;  " 
Literse  ad  prcepositos  primi  Ordinis;  Tiraboschi,  <i/.  aV.,  vol.  li,  p.  140.  "Cum  ad 
sopiendum  vel  sepeliendum  potius  scandalum,  qucd  contra  vos  fuerat  suscitatum  non 
paucis  credentibus,  vos  constitutiones  Ecclesiasticas  non  servare,  ad  nostram  pre- 
sentiam  certos  nuntios  misissetis,  mandatis  vos  apostolicis  exponentes,  nos  proposita 
vestra  de  consilio  venerabilis  fratris  nostris  Vercellensis  Episcopi,  et  dilecti  filii  Leco- 
diensis  et  bone  memorie  de  Cerreto  Abbatum,  mandavimus  in  unum  regulare  pro- 
positum conformari.  Cumque  ipsi  presentatam  sibi  a  vobis  vite  vestre  formulam  et 
regulam,  quam  proponitis  profiteri,  examinassent  diligentius,  et  in  aliquibus  correxis- 
sent,  nos  earn  tandem  per  dilectos  filios.  .  .  .  examinari  fecimus,  et  tandem  correxi- 


62        SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  AS  SI  SI 

Rule,  then,  is  based  on  the  principles  and  the  manner  of  life 
which  the  Humiliati  had  adopted.  The  modifications  made  by- 
Innocent,  and  his  arguments  in  support  of  those  modifications, 
are  evidence  bearing  on  the  attitude  of  the  Curia  toward  the 
Apostolic  movement  after  the  "  false  Humiliati  "  and  the  fol- 
lowers of  Waldo  had  proved  how  strong  a  hold  that  movement 
had  over  the  people. 

There  are  really  three  separate  Rules :  for  the  First,  the 
Second,  and  the  Third  Orders  respectively.'  The  first  two 
show  most  clearly  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were 
adopted ;  the  third  throws  most  light  on  the  character  of  the 
whole  movement.  The  Biblical  extracts  cited  as  authority  for 
the  regulations  are,  it  is  most  probable,  those  by  which  the 
Humiliati  themselves  had  been  influenced  to  their  convictions. 
"  You  propose,"  runs  the  Rule,  "  to  seek  humility  of  heart  and 
gentleness  in  life  by  God's  aid.  As  the  Lord  says  in  the  Gospel : 
*  Learn  of  me,  for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart,  and  ye  shall 
find  rest  unto  your  souls.'  "  ^  Then,  doubtless  having  in  mind 
the  stiff-necked  behavior  of  those  other  Humiliati,  as  well  as  the 
doubtful  position  of  those  to  whom  the  Church's  sanction  was 
to*  be  given,  the  writer  of  the  amended  Rule  proceeds:  "You 
propose  to  render  obedience  to  the  Church's  prelates,  as  the 
Apostle  says,  '  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you  and  sub- 
mit yourselves;  for  they  watch  for  your  souls  as  they  that  must 
give  account,'  3  for  that  is  not  true  humility  which  lacks  obed- 
ience as  a  yoke-fellow." 

The  disobedient  Humiliati  "  abstained  from  law  suits."  The 
Order  authorized  by  Innocent  were  told:  "patience  is  also 
necessary,  especially  in  adversity,  to  bear  evils  inflicted  upon 
you  by  others.  As  the  Lord  saith  in  the  Gospel :  '  It  hath 
been  said,  an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth ;   but  I  say 

mus  per  nos  ipsos,  et  correctam  curavimus  approbare."  Litera  ad  dilectis filiis  de 
Braida,  Tiraboschi,  op.  cit.,  pp.  135-136.  Cf.  Litem  ad  Ministros  tertii  ordinis, 
op.  cit.,  p.  128. 

1  Tiraboschi,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  128  seq.,  135  seq.,  139  seq.     The  Bull  was  issued 
June  7,  1 20 1. 

*  Matt.  II  :  29.  '  Heb.  13:  17. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  AT  I  63 

unto  you  that  ye  resist  not  evil ;  but  whosoever  shall  smite  thee 
on  the  right  cheek  turn  to  him  the  other  also ;  and  whosoever 
shall  compel  thee  to  go  with  him  a  mile,  go  with  him  twain, 
and  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  law  and  take  thy  coat,  let  him 
have  thy  cloke  also.' '  Again,  the  Apostle  :  '  Dearly  beloved, 
avenge  not  yourselves,  but  rather  give  place  unto  wrath ;  for  it 
is  written,  vengeance  is  mine,  I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord.'^* 
Again  he  saith  also :  '  Now  therefore  there  is  utterly  a  fault 
among  you,  because  ye  go  to  law  one  with  another.  Why  do 
ye  not  rather  take  wrong?  why  do  ye  not  rather  suffer  your- 
selves to  be  defrauded  ?  '  3  And  again  the  Lord  in  the  Gospel : 
'In  your  patience  possess  ye  your  souls.' 'f  Again,  'Forgive, 
and  ye  shall  be  forgiven.'  ^  Imbue  yourselves  also  with  fervent 
charity  which  is  summed  up  in  two  precepts,  that  is  to  say  in 
the  love  toward  your  God  and  your  neighbor,  as  it  is  written : 
'  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  with* 
all  thy  soul  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thy- 
self.' ^  Charity  should  be  shown  even  to  thy  enemies,  for  the 
Lord  said :  '  Do  good  to  them  that  hate  you,  and  pray  for  them 
which  despitefully  use  you  and  persecute  you,  that  ye  may  be 
the  children  of  your  father  which  is  in  Heaven  ;  for  He  maketh 
His  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on 
the  just  and  on  the  unjust.'  ^  Also  the  Apostle :  '  If  thine 
enemy  hunger,  feed  him,  and  if  he  thirst,  give  him  drink.'  "  ^ 
One  of  the  reproaches  cast  upon  the  Church  by  Apostolic  re- 
formers was  that,  contrary  to  the  commands  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles,  her  prelates  engaged  in  law  suits  and  contentions. 
For  this  Arnold  attacked  the  Clergy ;  so  did  the  Apostolics  of 
Cologne,  and  Waldo.?  So  did  earnest  Churchmen  who  re- 
mained sons  of  the  Church  whose  faults  they  saw  and  lamented.'" 

1  Matt.  5  :  38-41.  *  Rom.  12 :  19. 

'  I  Cor.  6:7.  *  Luke  21 :  19. 

*  Luke  6 :  37.  *  Matt.  22 :  37-39. 

'  Matt.  5  :  44-45.  ■  Rom.  12 :  20. 
'  See  above,  pp.  22  seq. 

1"  See  reproach  by  Alexander  II  to  the  clergy  of  Lucca,  in  Memorie  di  Matilda^ 
vol,  ii,  p.  133.     Also  Pet.  Damiani,  ep.  i,  15.     Opera,  ed.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  25. 


64 


SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 


It  may  well  be,  then,  that  the  Humiliati  who  defied  the  Church 
had  decided  on  the  basis  of  these  very  texts  cited  in  Innocent's 
Rule  that  Christ  had  intended  His  disciples  to  "  abstain  from 
law  suits." 

The  disobedient  Humiliati  "  abstained  from  oaths."  Ap- 
parently the  Humiliati  of  the  Rule  had  wished  Innocent  to  allow 
them  also  to  refrain  from  oaths.  This  the  Pope  could  not  do 
without  some  qualification;  for  taking  an  oath  was  a  necessary 
part  of  many  business  transactions,  and  jurisdiction  over  all 
cases  in  which  an  oath  was  involved  belonged  to  the  Church. ' 
Here,  then,  the  great  statesman  was  on  difficult  ground.  The 
Humiliati,  in  the  Rule  which  he  had  told  them  to  prepare,  had 
incorporated  a  principle  held  by  all  m.embers  of  their  brother- 
hood, the  disobedient  and  the  wavering  alike,  which  he  could 
not  sanction  their  retaining.  They  believed  that  this  tenet 
rested  on  an  incontrovertible  command  of  Christ.  Innocent 
had  then  to  bring  them  to  a  different  interpretation  of  Christ's 
command,  or  lose  their  loyalty  and  drive  them  into  the  ranks  of 
the  too  numerous  apostolic  heretics,  among  whom  were  already 
counted  many  of  their  brethren.  He  began  his  amended  ver- 
sion of  this  section  of  the  Rule  with  the  clear,  unqualified  state- 
ment which  had  doubtless  formed  a  part  of  the  Rule  as  they 
had  submitted  it  to  him — the  apostolic  mandate  on  which  other 
Christians  have  based  a  belief  in  the  sinfulness  of  all  oaths. 
"'But  above  all  things,  my  brethren,  swear  not  at  all,  neither 
by  Heaven,  neither  by  earth,  neither  by  any  other  oath;  but 
let  your  yea  be  yea,  and  your  nay,  nay;  lest  ye  fall  into  con- 
demnation,' as  saith  the  blessed  Apostle  James." '^  Having  laid 
down  for  the  order  as  a  law  for  their  guidance  a  precept  they 
had  adopted,  the  Pope  proceeded  to  "  interpret "  it.  "For," 
he  says,  "  the  indiscreet  and  impulsive  taking  of  oaths  is  for- 
bidden, not  only  by  James  in  his  Epistle  but  by  Christ  Himself, 
who  said:  "  It  hath  been  said  by  them  of  old  time,  Thou  shalt 
not  forswear  thyself  but  shalt  perform  unto  the  Lord  thine 
oaths;   but  I  say  unto  you.  Swear  not  at  all,  neither  by  Heaven^ 

'  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  c.  xxii,  qu.  5,  c.  7;   and  X  bk.  ii,  tit.  i,  c.  13. 
James  5:12. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  AT  I  65 

for  it  is  God's  throne;  nor  by  the  earth,  for  it  is  His  footstool; 
neither  by  Jerusalem,  for  it  is  the  city  of  the  great  King. 
Neither  shalt  thou  swear  by  thy  head,  because  thou  canst  not 
make  one  hair  white  or  black.'  "  ' 

There  follows  the  explanation  by  which  Innocent  tried  to  pre- 
vent these  Humiliati  from  interpreting  these  commands  in  the 
painfully  literal  way  which  the  Church  had  reason  to  dread,  be- 
cause of  her  experience  with  other  Apostolic  Christians. 
"When  Christ  says,  '  Swear  not  at  all,'  it  is  impulsive  swearing 
that  He  prohibits.  And,  indeed,  should  we  take  oaths  not  from 
impulse,  but  from  necessity.  When  He  adds,  '  neither  by  earth 
nor  by  heaven,'  He  forbids  indiscreet  swearing,  because  we 
should  not  swear  by  the  creature,  but  rather  by  the  Creator, 
'  But  let  your  communication  be  yea,  yea ;  and  nay,  nay,''  that  is, 
whatever  you  utter  in  affirmation  or  denial,  should  be  the  thought 
of  your  heart.  For  not  only  affirmation  or  denial  is  involved, 
but  rather  truth  itself,  as  Christ  according  to  John  frequently 
says  in  the  Gospel,  '  I  say  unto  you  Amen,  Amen.'  All  that 
goes  further  than  this  leans  to  the  side  of  evil;  its  nature,  how- 
ever, is  not  so  much  that  of  culpa  as  of  poena.  Furthermore, 
the  burden  of  the  oath  rests  less  on  him  who  takes  it  than  on 
him  who  requires  it,  because  it  proceeds  from  that  weakness 
which  is  ever  a  matter  rather  of  poena  than  of  culpa." 

Innocent  would  have  the  Humiliati  understand,  moreover, 
that  Christ  and  the  Apostles  did  not,  as  they  had  supposed,  pro- 
hibit the  taking  of  oaths,  but  on  the  contrary  sanctioned  the 
practice.  "  It  is  permitted,"  proceeds  the  Rule,  "  to  swear 
under  the  compulsion  of  necessity.  This  is  taught  by  the 
Apostle  when  he  says,  '  For  men  verily  swear  by  the  greater ; 
and  an  oath  for  confirmation  is  to  them  an  end  of  all  strife. '^ 
The  angel  also,  whom  John  saw  in  the  apocalypse,  who  stood 
'  upon  the  sea  and  upon  the  earth,  and  lifted  up  his  hands  to 
Heaven,  sware  by  Him  that  liveth  for  ever  and  ever.*  And 
thou  shalt  swear,  the  Lord  liveth  in  truth,  in  judgment,  and  in 
righteousness,'  saith  Jeremiah  the  Prophet."  ^ 

'  Matt.  5  :  33-36.  'Matt.  5:37.  ^Ileb.  6:i6. 

*Rev.  10:  5.  *Jer.  4:  2. 


66       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

This  portion  of  the  Rule  has  been  quoted  somewhat  at  length 
because  it  shows  the  great  anxiety  of  Innocent  to  retain  these 
Humiliati  within  the  Church.'  Starting  with  an  apparent  agree- 
ment that  they  may  keep  a  tenet  and  a  practice,  itself  a  funda- 
mental belief  of  all  the  Humiliati  and  of  other  Apostolic 
Christians,  whose  influence  the  Church  had  reason  to  dread; 
which  would,  unqualified,  inevitably  lead  to  conflict  with  the 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  authorities,  the  Pope  "  diligently  cor- 
rected "  and  qualified  the  original,  unequivocal  statement 
"  Swear  not  at  all,"  until  the  Rule  no  longer  threatens  any  con- 
troversy or  difficulty.  That  they  accepted  the  Papal  interpre- 
tation of  their  own  doctrine  seems  unquestionable ;  there  is  no 
record  of  disobedience.' 

Preaching  was  one  of  the  characteristic  practices  of  the 
Humiliati,  and  persistence  in  preaching  in  the  face  of  the  un- 
qualified, uncompromising  prohibition  of  the  Pope  had  been  the 
form  of  disobedience  which  brought  about  the  condemnation  of 
the  "  false  Humiliati."  This  obligation,  believed  by  so  many 
Apostolic  Christians  to  have  been  laid  by  Christ  upon  His  ser- 
vants, was  incorporated  in  the  Rule  for  the  government  of  their 
life  submitted  to  Innocent  by  the  Humiliati  in  1201.  Innocent 
treated  the  subject  with  caution.  The  Rule  runs :  "  It  shall 
further  be  your  custom  to  come  together  in  a  suitable  place 
every  Lord's  Day ;  and  then  shall  one  or  more  of  the  brethren 
of  proved  faith  and  tried  religion,  powerful  in  deed  and  word, 
with  the  permission  of  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese,  utter  the  word 
of  exhortation,  warning  his  hearers  and  leading  them  to  honest 
habits  of  life,  in  such  a  way  that  no  word  shall  be  said  about 
the  articles  of  belief  and  the  sacraments  of  the  Church." 

•  In  Tiraboschi's  edition,  this  portion  of  the  Rule  occupies  more  than  two  pages 
out  of  a  total  of  eight. 

'This  part  of  the  Rule  admits  of  another  interpretation,  less  plausible  than  the  one 
adopted  above.  It  is  possible  that  the  prohibition  of  oaths  had  been  found  by  the 
Humiliati  themselves,  already  wavering  from  their  first  intention  to  follow  literally, 
at  no  matter  what  cost,  the  Gospel  commands,  to  be  inconvenient.  They  were  not 
ready  to  cast  aside  altogether  the  tenet  regarding  oaths.  They  were  glad  to  explain 
away  its  rigor.  But  even  if  this  interpretation  be  the  true  one,  it  does  not  disprove 
their  connection  with  the  heretical  Humiliati,  who  also  held  this  tenet. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  AT  I 


67 


The  license  to  preach  could  not  be  altogether  withheld  in  the 
face  of  the  insistence  of  the  Humiliati  and  the  risk  of  antago- 
nizing them.  It  was  therefore  given,  and  carefully  qualified. 
On  the  other  hand,  Innocent  provided  against  trouble  which 
might  be  caused  by  over-zealous  bishops.  **  Beyond  the  limits 
heretofore  stated,"  says  the  Rule,  "  we  forbid  any  bishop  to 
hinder  brethren  of  this  sort  from  uttering  the  word  of  exhorta- 
tion ;  since,  according  to  the  Apostle,  the  Spirit  ought  not  to 
be  quenched." 

The  Third  Order,  from  whose  Rule  the  preceding  quotations 
have  been  made,  were,  it  must  be  remembered,  like  the  legen- 
dary founders  of  the  movement,  laymen  living  not  apart  from 
the  world,  but  at  home  with  their  families.  According  to  the 
Chronicle  of  Laon,  the  heretical  Humiliati  resembled  them.' 
Whatever  can  be  learned  concerning  the  manner  of  life  of  the 
Third  Order  bears  directly  on  the  "  false  Humiliati."  Involved 
as  they  must  be  in  secular  affairs,  they  were,  nevertheless,  so 
runs  the  Rule,'  to  obey  the  laws  of  Christ.  "  '  All  things  what- 
soever ye  would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to 
them.'  3  *  Strive  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate ;  for  wide  is  the 
gate,  and  broad  is  the  way,  that  leadeth  to  destruction  and  many 
there  be  that  go  in  thereat ;  because  strait  is  the  gate  and  narrow 
is  the  way,  which  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there  be  that  find 
it.'  *  Further,  keep  peace  with  all  men ;  and  return  all  money 
taken  in  usury  and  all  ill-gotten  gains." 

All  the  three  orders  of  the  authorized  Humiliati  held  prop- 
erty. The  members  of  the  Second  order  were  communists.* 
Apparently  the  brethren  of  the  Third  held  possessions  as  indi- 
viduals ;  for  the  Rule  provided  that  they  were  to  supply  the 
needs  of  brethren  who  were  in  need,  and  disabled  by  illness.^ 
If  property  were  held  in  common,  all  would  have  shared  alike 

'  See  above,  pp.  59  seq.  *Tiraboschi,  of.  cit,,  p.  131. 

"  Matt.  2:12.  ♦  Matt.  7 :  13. 

*Tiraboschi,  op.  cit.,  pp.  136-137. 

•  Sciatis  autem,  quod  vestri  moris  existit,  si  quis  de  vestra  societate  rebus  tempor- 
alibus  indiguerit,  aut  forte  infirmitate  detentus  fuerit,  tam  in  rebus  temporalibus  quam 
in  custodia  necessaria  ei  subvenire.     Ibid.,  p.  133. 


68       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

as  a  matter  of  course,  and  no  such  provision  in  the  Rule  would 
have  been  necessary.  The  Rule  lays  certain  restrictions  on  the 
use  of  all  property  possessed  by  the  Second  and  Third  orders, 
as  communities  or  as  individuals.  The  First  order  was  to  pay 
no  tithes — quite  naturally,  as  the  brethren  were  priests.'  The 
Second  order  paid  tithes  on  property,  but  not  on  products." 
The  Third  or  secular  order  was  laid  under  strict  obligations  as 
to  the  duties  of  its  members  to  contribute  in  this  way  to  the 
support  of  the  Church.  They  were  to  pay  tithes  and  first- 
fruits.  They  were  on  no  account  themselves  to  possess  tithes. 
Nor  was  their  property  really  their  own  after  the  tithes  were 
paid.  "Of  the  fruits  that  remain  to  you,  you  ought  to  give 
alms.  Give  to  the  poor  all  that  is  left  after  your  just  and  neces- 
sary expenses  are  paid.  '  Give  alms  of  such  things  as  ye  have; 
and  behold,  all  things  are  clean  unto  you.' 3  Again,  '  Lay  not 
up  for  yourselves  treasures  upon  earth,  where  moth  and  rust 
doth  currupt,  and  where  thieves  break  through  and  steal ;  but 
lay  up  for  yourselves  treasures  in  heaven,  where  neither  m.oth 
nor  rust  doth  corrupt,  and  where  thieves  do  not  break  through 
nor  steal.'  "  * 

Between  the  "  false  Humiliati "  and  the  Humiliati  who  form- 
ulated the  Rule  which,  with  certain  amendments,  was  issued 
with  the  Papal  sanction  and  has  been  in  part  analyzed,  there 
existed  a  resemblance  so  close  that  they  must  have  been  orig- 
inally one  body.  The  Biblical  commands  cited  in  the  Rule  as 
authority  for  the  tenets  and  practices  of  the  brethren  were 
probably  the  original  sources  of  their  conviction  that  those 
customs  and  practices  were  enjoined  by  Christ  upon  His  fol- 
lowers and  maintained  during  the  Apostolic  Age.  The  Humil- 
iati whose  reconciliation  with  the  Church  was  assured  by  Inno- 
cent's careful  policy,  departed  from  the  spirit  of  the  m.ovement, 
which  was  essentially  an  apostolic  one.  Their  fate  is  a  matter 
of  history,  and   of  history  which  has   no   part  in   an   essay  on 

'Tiraboschi,   o^.   eit.,  p    142.     Cf.  document  giving  them   the  right  to  redeem 
tithes  (1186).     Tiraboschi,  vol.  ii,  p.  119. 
*Ibid.,^.  137. 
'Luke  11:41.  *Matt.  6:  19-20. 


THE  HUM  I  LI  AT  I  6^ 

primitive  Christianity.'  The  other  Humiliati,  false  according 
to  Innocent  III,  true  to  their  convictions  at  great  cost,  were  lost 
to  sight  among  the  Apostolic  heretics  who  abounded  in  Lom- 
bardy.  They  had  much  in  common  with  Arnold  of  Brescia, 
and  may  easily  have  coalesced  with  his  disciples.  Like  him, 
they  believed  in  a  life  of  poverty,  not  destitution.  With  him, 
they  agreed  that  tithes  and  first-fruits  should  be  given  to  the 
clergy.  On  the  other  hand,  like  the  followers  of  Arnold,  they 
were  naturally  swept  along  with  the  Waldensian  portion  of  the 
apostolic  movement. 

The  Humiliati  and  the  Arnoldists  lost  their  separate  identity 
in  their  fusion  with  the  Waldenses,  to  whose  rapid  progress  in 
Lombardy  both  largely  contributed.  They  are  referred  to  by 
name  as  late  as  1213;=  but  they  are  coupled  with  the  Poor 
Men  of  Lyons.  The  heresies  ascribed  to  both  sects  are :  that 
they  preach  in  secret,  and  assail  the  priesthood  and  the  Church 
of  God.3  Stephen  of  Bourbon,  when  he  names  the  sect  exist- 
ing in  Lombardy,  on  the  authority  of  a  man  who  for  eighteen 
years  had  studied  in  the  sect  of  the  Waldenses  in  Milan,  does 
not  mention  the  Humiliati.  Perhaps,  however,  they  are  to  be 
recognized  in  the  "  Poor  Men  of  Lombardy,  who  receive  pos- 
sessions."* For,  if  the  practice  of  the  heretical  Humiliati  is 
revealed  by  the  Rule,  they  owned  property,  but  yet  were  poor, 
since  they  reserved  for  themselves  only  enough  to  supply  actual 
needs,  and  gave  all  that  remained  as  alms.  To  their  influence 
and  that  of  the  Arnoldists  may  be  in  part  ascribed  the  peculiar 
character,  different  in  some  features  from  their  French  brethren, 

•  The  order  fell  into  disrepute.  In  1560  it  was  abolished,  except  for  the  sisterhood 
of  the  Second  Order,  called  Blassonist  Nun»  after  Clara  Blasso  of  Milan.  Real  En- 
eyclopaedie,  vol.  viii,  p.  447. 

*  Burckardi  et  Cuonradi  Urspergensium  Chronicon,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii, 
P-  376. 

*The  Papal  approval  of  the  Franciscans  and  Dominicans  is  here  definitely  as- 
cribed to  the  existence  of  the  Humiliati  and  the  Poor  Men  of  Lyons,  whose  influ- 
•ence  it  was  hoped  might  be  counteracted  by  the  Mendicant  Orders. 

* "  In  occultis  quoque  predicationibus,  quas  faciebant  plerumque  in  latibulis, 
ecclesiae  Dei  et  sacerdotibus  derogabatur."  L.  c.  Steph.  Borb.  Tractatus,  etc.,  pt.  4, 
tit.  7,  par.  330,  ed.  cit.,  p.  280. 


70       SOME  FORERUNNERS  OF  ST.  FRANCIS  OF  ASSISI 

of  the  Lombard  Waldenses  and  the  German  converts  won  by 
their  missionaries.' 


The  foregoing  chapters  form  part  of  a  larger  work  which  the 
writer  hopes  some  day  to  complete.  This  will  deal  with  the 
Waldenses,  and  also  with  sundry  Forerunners  of  St.  Francis  of 
Assisi  who,  like  him,  remained  loyal  sons  of  the  Church. 

'  In  support  of  the  theory  that  the  rapid  growth  of  the  Waldensian  move- 
ment in  Lombardy  was  due  to  the  presence  of  the  Humiliati,  see,  among  other 
authorities,  Comba,  Valdo  ed  i  ]  'oldest,  pp.  99  seq.  Real  Encyclopadie,  vol.  viii, 
p.  477.  Lea,  /nguintion,  vol.  i,  p.  76.  Breyer,  Arnoldiiten,  p.  405.  For  the  mis- 
sions of  the  Lombard  Waldenses  in  Germany,  see  Muller,  op.  cii.,  pp.  loo-ioi; 
H.  Haupf,  op.  cit.,  Walden^erthum  und  Inquisition  im  Sud'cstHchen  Deutschland,  in 
Deutsche  Zeitschrift  fiir  Geschichtswissenschaft,  vol.  i,  pp.  285-286  (1889). 


BIBLIOQRAPHY 


General. 

Cantu,  Gli  heretici  d'ltalia. 

Gallia  Christiana. 

Hahn,  C.  U.,  Geschichte  der  Ketser  (1845-1850). 

Hefele,  Conciliengeschichte  (1873). 

Herzog,  Real-Encyclopaedie. 

Histoire  litteraire  de  la  France. 

Lea,  H.  C,  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Wattenbach,  Deutschland  Gcschichtsquellen  im  Mittelalter  (1893). 

Collections  of  Sources. 

d'Achery,  Veterum  aliquot  scriptorum  Spicilegium.     Ed.   1609-1685,  13 

volumes;  or  ed.  1723,  3  volumes.     Cited  d'Achery,  Spicilegium. 
Acta  Sanctorum,  Bollandist  collection.     Cited  AA.  SS.  Boll. 
Archivio  Storico  Italico. 
d'Argentre,  Collcctio  Judiciorum. 

Bihliothcca  Maxima   Veterum  Patrum  ...  a  Margarino  de  la  Eigne 
.  .  .  edita.     Ed.  Lugdunensi  (1677).     Cited  Bibl.  iMax.  Patr.  Lugd. 
Bouquet,  Scriptores  rerum  Gallicarum.     Cited  Bouquet. 
Dollinger,  Beitrdge  cur  Scktengeschichte.     Cited  DoUinger. 
Jaffe.  Bibliotheca  Rerum  Germanicarum.     Cited  Jafife,  B.  R.  G. 
Mansi,  Conciliorum  Amplissima  Collectio.     Cited  Mansi. 
Martene  et  Durand,  Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum  (1717)-    Cited  Mar- 

tene.  Thesaurus. 
Majrtene  et  Durand,  Veterum  Scriptorum  Amplissima  Collectio  (1724- 

1733).     Cited  Martene,  Ampl.  Coll. 
Migne,  Patrologiae  Latinae,  Cursus  Completus.     Cited  Migne. 
Monumenta  Germaniae  Historica: 
Scriptores.     Cited  M.  G.  H.  SS. 
Leges.     Cited  M.  G.  H.  LL. 
Preger,  Beitrdge  zur  Sektengeschichte;  in  Konigliche  Bayerische  Akad- 
emie  der  Wissensdhaften,  Philologische-'historische  Classe,  vols,  xiii, 
xiv.    Cited  Preger,  vols,  xiii,  xiv. 
Further,  the  Papal  Regesta: 
Jaffe,  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum.    Cited  Jaffe,  Regesta. 
Potthasit.  Regesta  PontiUcum  Romanorum.     Cited  Potthast,  Regesta. 

71 


72  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

CHAPTER  I. 
I.  Secondary  Authorities. 
Allard,  Le  Christianismc  ct  I'empire  Romain. 
Al'len,  A.  V.  G.,  Christian  Institutions. 
Oelarc,  5.  Gregoire  et  la  rcforme  de  I'eglisc. 
De  Wette,  Geschichte  der  christlichen  Sittenlehre. 
Dresdner,  A.,  Kultur  und  Sittengcschichte  der  italicnischcn  Geisflich- 

keit.     Im  loten  und  iiten  Jahrhunderts. 
Friedberg,  Kirchenrecht  (1895). 

Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire.    Ed.  Bury,  1896. 
Lecoy  de  la  Marche,  Albert,  La  chaire  frangaise  au  moyen  age. 
Milman,  History  of  Latin  Christianity. 
Montalembert,  The  Monks  of  the  West. 
Prevosit,  Lcs  eglises  et  les  campagnes  au  moyen  age. 
Reuter,  Die  Religiose  Aufkldrung  im  Mittelalter. 
Sommerlad,   T.   von.   Die    Wirthschaftliche   Thdtigkeit  der  Kirche  im 

Mittelalter. 
Wurm,  Der  Heilige  Bernard  von  Clairvaux. 

2.  Sources. 
Abaelardi,  Sermo  de  sancto  Joanne  haptisto.      In  Opera,   ed.   Cousin, 

vol.  i,  p.  572. 
iTS.  Arialdi  ct  Erlembaldi  Vita,  in  AA.  SS.  Boll.  V,  Junii.  p.  282. 
Bcnedicti  Rcgula  Monachorum,  recensuit  E.  WoelMin  (1895). 
S.  Bernard,  Dc  Consideratione,  lib.  4,  c.  2.     Opera,  ed.  Mabillon  (1690), 

vol.  i,  p.  436  et  seq. 
Berthold  von  Regens'burg,  Predigten,  ed.  Pfeiffer-Strohl,  vol.  i,  pp.  93, 

393- 
Codex  Theodosianus,  ed.  Mommsen,  1904. 
Desaderii,  Abbatis  Casinensis  Dialogi.  lib.   i,  Bibl.   Max.   Patr.   Lugd., 

vol.  xviii,  p.  339. 
Desiderius   (Pope  Victor  III),  De  Miraculis  S.  Benedicti.,  Bibl.  Max. 

Patr.  Lugd.,  vol.  xviii,  pp.  839-859. 
Ekkehard,  Casus  S.  Galli,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  ii.  p.  105  et  seq. 
Gerohus'  Reicbersbergensds  (+  1169),  De  Investigatione  Antichristi,  lib. 

i,  c.  42,  ed.  Scheibel'berger,  p.  88  et  seq. 
Guibertus  Novigenti,  De  pignoribus  sanctorum,  lib.  i,  c.  3,  ed.  Opera, 

ed.  d'Achery,  p.  334  et  seq.  (1651). 
Guibertus  Novigenti,  De  vita  sua,  ed.  cited,  p.  467. 
Guillelmtts  de  Podio  Laurentii,  Historic  Albigensiutn,  Bouquet,  vol.  xix, 

p.  200  et  seq. 
Hugo,  Destructio  Farfense,  M.  G.  iH.  SS.,  vol.  xi.  p.  532  ct  seq. 
Igniacensis,  S.  Bernardi  discipuli.  Sermo  in  solemnitate  omnium  sanc- 
torum.    Opera  S.  Bernardi,  ed.  cited,  vol.  ii,  pp.  1043- 1044. 
Lactantius,  De  mortibus  pcrsecutorum.     Migne,  vol.  vii,  c.  189-276. 
5.  Norberti  Vita,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xii,  p.  673. 
Satire  on  Urban  II,  by  a  Henrician  priest,  PAugk-Harttung,  Iter  Ital- 

icum  (1883),  p.  439  et  seq. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  73 

Seheri,  Primordia  Calmosiacensis,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xii,  p.  324  et  seq. 
Suger,  Gesta  Ludovici  regis  cognomento  grossi,  cc.  2,  23,  ed.  Molinier, 

in  Collection  des  textes  pour  scrvir  a  I'etude  de  I'histoire  de  la 

France. 

CHAPTER  II. 
I.  Secondary  Authorities. 
Fusslin,  J.  C,  Unparteiische  Kirchen  und  Ketserhistorie  (i77o). 
Mosheim,  Ketzergeschichte  (1746). 
Rohrich,  Die  Gottesfreunde  und  die  IVinkeler  am  Oberrhein,  in  lUgen's 

Zeitschrift  fiir  die  historischc  Theologie,  vol.  x,  pt.  4,  p.  118  et  seq. 

(1840). 
Schmidt,  C,  Histoire  des  Cathares  (1849). 
Tocco,  Felice,  Eresia  nel  medio  evo  (1884). 

2.  Sources. 
Actus  PontiUcum  Ccnomannis,  De  Hildebcrto.     Mabillon,  Vetera  Ana- 

lecta,  p.  315.     Also  in  Bouquet,  vol.  xii,  p.  547- 
Adeynari  Historiarum  libri  III,  li'b.  3,  c.  69,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  iv,  p. 

148. 
Alberici  Monachi  Trium  Fontium  Chronica,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii, 

p.  840. 
Annales  Colonienses  maxima,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xvii,  p.  778. 
S.  Bernardi,  Epistolae  241.  242,  ed.  cited',  vol.  i,  pp.  237-239. 

Scrmones  In  Cantica,  65,  66.     Ibid.,  p.  1490  et  seq. 
Bonacursi,    Vita  haereticorum,  ed.   d'Achery,   Spicilegium,  vol.   xiii.  p. 

63  et  seq. 
'Codex  Theodosianus,  lib.  16,  tit.  5,  ed.  Mommsen. 
Concilium  Karrofense  (1028),  Mansi,  vol.  xix,  cc.  485  ct  seq. 
Epistola  ecclesiae  Leodiensis  ad  Lucium  papam  II   (1144).   Martene, 

Ampl.  Coll.,  vol.  i,  cc.  777-77^- 
Epistola  Trajectensis  ecclesiae  ad archiepiscopum  Coloniensem 

(1112),  d'Argentre,  Collectio  Judiciorum,  vol.  i,  p.  n. 
Everwini  Steinfeldcnsis  praepositi,  Epistola  ad  S.  Bernardum:  De  hae- 

reticis  sui  temporis  Mabillon,  Vetera  Analecta,  p.  473  et  seq.     Also 

in  S.  Bernardi  Opera,  ed.  cited,  vol.  i,  p.  1487  et  seq. 
Cesta  Trcverorum  Episcoporum,  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  viii,  p.  130  et  seq. 
Hugo  Metellus,  Epistola  ad  Henrico  Leuchorum  Episcopo;  \n  Sacrae 

Antiquitatis  Monumenta  Historica  (in  oppido  Sancti  Deodati,  1731). 

vol.  ii,  p.  347  et  seq. 
Moncta  Cremonensis  adv.  Catharos  ct  Valdenses,  ed.  Rome,  1743- 
Petri  Venerabilis  aibbatis  Cluniacensis  IX,  Epistola  sive  Tractatus  ad- 

versus  Petrobrusianos  haereticos,  Bibl.  Max.  Patr.  Ludg.,  vol.  xxii, 

p.  1033  et  seq.  t       ^         1        • 

Potho  of  Priim,  De  statu  domus  Dei,  Bibl.  Max.  Patr.  Lugd.,  vol.  xxi. 

p.  489  et  seq. 
Rodulfi  Glabri,  Francorum  historiae  libri  V,  lib  3.  Bouquet,  vol.  x,  p.  35- 
Synodus  Attrcbatcnsis  (1025),  Mansi,  vol.  xix,  cc.  424-425- 


74 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


CHAPTER  III. 

I.  Sf-condary  Authorities. 

Breyer,  Rotert,  Die  Arnoldisten.     In  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschichte, 

vol.  xii,  p.  387  et  seq. 
Breyer,  Arnold  von  Brescia.     In  Maurenbrecher,  Historisches  Taschen- 

buch,  1889,  p.  123  et  seq. 
Clavel,  v.,  Arnauld  de  Brescia  et  les  Romains  du  XI I^  siecle  (1868). 
Giesebrecht,  Arnold  von  Brescia  (1873).     Sitsungs-berichte  der  k'dnigl. 

Baier.  Ak.  der  Wissensch.  Phil.  hist.  Classe. 
Giesebreoht,  Geschichte  der  Dcutschcn  Kaiserseit  (1874-1895). 
Greg'orovius,  Geschichte  der  Stadt  Rom  im  Mittclalter  (1886-1896). 
Guibal,  Arnaud  de  Brescia  et  les  Hohenstauffen  (1868). 
Guerzoni,  Arnaldo  da  Brescia  secondo  gli  ultimi  studi  (1882). 
Odorici,  Storie  Bresciano. 
Vacandard,  M.,  Arnault  de  Brescia.     In  Revue  des  Questions  Histor- 

iques,  vol.  xxxv,  p.  61  et  seq.  (1884). 
For  Abdard: 

Deutsoh,  S.  M.,  Peter  Abelard. 

Hausrat'h,  Petrus  Abdlard. 

McCabe,  Joseph,  Peter  Abelard. 
For  the  Pataria : 

Pach,  Die  Pataria  in  Mailand,  1056-1077. 

Pellegrini,  /  santi  Arialdo  ed  Erlembaldo. 

RotorKli,  Pataria  di  Milano.     In  Archivio  storico  Italico  (1807). 

2.  Sources. 
Abelard,  Historia  Calamitalum.    Opera,  ed.  Cousin,  vol.  i,  p.  25  et  seq. 
Annales  Brixienses,  M.  G.  'H.  SS.,  vol.  xviii,  p.  812  et  seq. 
S.  Bernardi  Epistolae,  189,  195,  196,  243,  244,  330,  ed.  cited,  vol.  i,  p. 

182  et  seq. 
Berthold  von  Regensburg,  Sermon:    Saelic  sint  die  reines  hersens  sint, 

ed.  cited,  vol.  i,  p.  388  et  seq. 
Durandus  of  Mende,  Rationale  divinorum  oMciorum,  ed.  Fust  &  Schof- 

fer,  Mainz,  1459. 
Epistolae:  (i)  "Cujusdam  senatus  fidelis";  (2)  Wezeli.     In  Epistolae 

IVibaldi.  Jaffe,  B.  R.  G.,  vol.  i,  p.  216  et  seq. 
Epistola  Eugenii  papae  III,    Universo  clero  Romano    (1148).     Jaffe, 

Regesta,  1281.     Mansi,  vol.  xxi,  c.  628. 
Gerohus    Reichersbergensis,   Dc   Investigatione   Antichristi,   lib.   3,    ed. 

cited.     Also,  De  Novitatibus  hujus  saeculi,  publisihed  by  Grisar,  in 

"Gercyh   irber  die    Investitursfrage " ;    Zeitschrift   fiir   Katholische 

Theologie,  vol.  ix,  p.  549  et  seq.   (1885). 
Gesta  di  Federico  in  Italia,  In  Fonti  di  storia  d'ltalia,  vol.  i,  (1887). 
Gunther,  Ligurinus,  In  Veterum  Scriptorum  .  .  .  Collectio,  ex  Biblio- 

theca  Justi  Reuberi  (Frankfurt,  1584).  vol.  i,  p.  322  et  seq. 
Hadriani  papae  IV  vita.     In  Watterich,  Pontificum  Romanorum  Vitae, 

vol.  ii,  p.  344  et  seq. 
Historia  Pontificalis.     In  M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  516  et  seq. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  yc 

Walter  Map,  De  Nugis  Curialium,  d.  i,  c.  24,  ed.  Wright  (1850),  p.  43. 
Otto  of  Freisinig,  De  Gesta  Friderici  I,  Imperatoris.     M.  G.  H.  SS.,  vol. 

XX,  p.  403  et  seq. 
Stephen  of  Bourbon,  Tractatus  de  diversis  materiis  praedicabilibus,  pt. 

iv,  tit.  7,  €d.  Lecoy  de  la  Marohe,  p.  281. 

CHAPTER  IV. 
I.  Secondary  Authorities. 
Breyer,  Die  Arnoldisten. 
Tiraboschi,  Girolamo,  Vetera  hutniliatorum  monumenta,  vol.  i   (1766). 

2.  Sources. 
Burchardi  (1226)  et  Cuonradi  (+1229)   Urspergensium  Chronicon,  M. 

G.  H.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  376  et  seq. 
Epistola  Innoccntii  papae  III  ad  Feronensi  Episcopus.    In  Epistolae  In- 

nocentii  papae  HI,  lib.  ii,  no.  228.     Migne,  vol.  214,  cc.  788-789. 
S.  Joanne  de  Meda,  Vita.     (Taken  from  an  office  for  the  use  of  the 

Humiliati,  written  long  after  the  death  of  the  subject.    The  date  is 

unkrhown.)     AA.  SS.  Boll.  VII  Sept.,  p.  346  et  seq. 
Rules  for  the  Three  Orders  of  the  Humiliati  (1201).    Tiraiboschi,  tfetd., 

vol.  iii,  p.  128  et  seq. 
Torrechius,   Hieronymus,   Chronicon   ordinis  Humiliatorum.     Written 

about  1419.    Tiraboschi,  vol.  iii,  p.  230  et  seq. 
Stephen  of  Bourbon,   Tractatus,  &c.,  pt.  4,  tit  7,  par.  330,  ed.  cited, 

p.  280. 


A 


DUE  DATE 

£]             IJA 

. 

^    m 

R  1  8  1989 

^ 

201-6503 

Printed 
in  USA 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


0021807515 

h  r. 


